Authors note. This article was first published in July 2012. Updated comments from the ABS appear at the end further confirming the thrust of my thesis.

In his book “Losing My Religion” Bishop Tom Frame (He is the Priest that conducted the services after the Bali bombings.) concludes that “Unless there is a turnaround in the fortunes of all community organizations by 2025 the Christian Church will be a marginal player in Australian life with a few remaining remnants. When the Christian affiliation of the population drops below 50 per cent, projected to happen around 2030, those identifying as Christians will be found in four main clusters. The Roman Catholic Church will continue to exercise sufficient discipline among its people to resist the mutating of popular culture. The Pentecostal/Charismatic churches will flourish in the larger cities, form communities within communities and become more sect like.”

He goes on to say that. “Those churches that do not present an attractive and credible alternative to popular culture will disappear. Left leaning cause driven liberal Protestant Churches that lack doctrinal rigor and are preoccupied with the promotion of social justice and cultural inclusion will be the first to go.”

Conclusions


The conclusions he draws would appear to be backed up by the results of the recent five yearly Australian census, which showed a remarkable increase of 30% in unbelief. In fact, five of the eight states and territories now have more unbelievers than believers. In country areas, Christian churches are closing at a rapid rate and this is attributable to a number of factors including an ageing population. Much research has been done over many years into the decline of belief and church attendance in Australia.

Reasons


Early on, the motor car was thought to be a cause because it opened society to other forms of recreation. Later television and the advent of the Sunday night movie were blamed for the demise of Sunday evening services. Today only around 7% of the population regularly attends Sunday services. Of these many are what I call culture or recreational church goers who don’t have a particularly strong belief,but attend because it forms part of their social circle or they play (or sing) in a band where they get opportunities they would not otherwise. Therefore, when these people are deducted from the 7% there is very little real belief.

However, the main reason for the decline in belief I would suggest is the fact that children are now better educated than their parents. Today’s generation questions everything. Coupled with a simple access to information on the internet it is now easy too reason and question traditional problematic belief. Young people are able to type any question about biblical belief into Google and then apply with an inquiring mind their own reason and logic.

Enlightened Young


In addition, the problem for the enlightened young in a technology driven society is the lack of demonstrably hard evidence to corroborate the existence of a personal God. For example. If you were to type in “virgin birth” then do some research, you are likely after considering the evidence conclude that no such event took place or at best, it is highly unlikely that it did. Alternatively, you could type in “contradictions of the bible” and if you are a reasoned person, you could only conclude that the book is unreliable as history and is lacking in factual content. That is not to say that it is not an important work in terms of literature or philosophy.

The young have also become impatient with religions inability or failure to remedy human suffering and put an end to social equality. If anything, it tends to exacerbate these problems. Moreover, of course the young find it difficult to fathom how the moral problems of today can be solved by refereeing to a moral landscape thousands of a year old, which was written by humans with intellectually inferior brains than the advanced minds of today. They are being asked to accept a set of rules that assume that the world they live in has never progressed scientifically or socially. They conclude that religion (and its God) is a man- made concept and it has been an historical monumental failure.

So in Australia given that the census (taken every five years) continues on its downward spiral and Bishop Frame is correct in his assumptions we could expect that within 15 or 20 years the Christian church will no longer exist.

Although this piece focuses on Australian faith it is worth noting that recent surveys in the US see for the first time a decline in belief in people under 30. This also backs up my reasoning on the impact of education outside of traditional sources.

continue

The demarcation between Church and state.


In Australia, we have always taken secularism seriously and although Catholics were once aligned with the left of politics, that association no longer exists. If religion puts its nose, too far into the political arena it is gently told to but out. However, with the likelihood next year of the election of Tony Abbott we will have a Prime Minister unafraid to inflict his Catholic beliefs upon an unwary electorate.

He takes his Catholicism seriously. His past spontaneous outbursts about his daughters virginity, his fear of homosexuality, his opposition to abortion, his veto (as Health Minister) of the RU486 drug, his views on euthanasia, his opposition to same sex marriage and stem cell research all give confirmation to a dogma more attune to Rome than the changing moral landscape of Australia.

Andrew Robb, Malcolm Turnbull, Joe Hockey, Kevin Andrews and other Catholics will constitute a distinctive and coherent group in an Abbott ministry and to quote former PM Malcolm Fraser “Well, they are different. They are not Australians; they owe their loyalty to the Pope”. Abbott has personified church ties with politics through his relationship with the man he has called his confessor, Cardinal George Pell. Pell is of average intellect with an almost obsessive relationship to Rome. He sees the upholding of Church tradition and its survival as being more important than his flock and his protection of the church in cases of child abuse is offensive to most people.

What then comes into question is Abbott’s inability to distinguish between faith, politics, and the rapid decline in belief. As a democracy, we respect the right of organizations including the church to hold views that represent their beliefs and to promote their ideas. However, these views should always be in proportion to the influence and size of the organization it seeks to represent because primarily we are a secular democracy and no one should forget it.

Survey on religion. Some recent research.


AUSTRALIANS see spirituality as quite separate from religion, with the former much more widely accepted, according to the results of a national survey to be released in Melbourne today.

What they really dislike is celebrities endorsing religion, stories of healing and miracles, and doctrines about homosexuality and hell.

Commissioned by Olive Tree media, the survey of 1094 people shows that while Australians are generally open to spirituality, they feel they are unlikely to find it in church.

Read more here.

Olive Tree director Karl Faase, who is releasing the report at a forum of 70 religious leaders, said the survey sought to identify the ”blocker issues” that turned people off faith.

The obstacle that annoys Australians most is the celebrity endorsements of religion so common in the United States – 70 per cent said they were repelled by it, questioning the motives behind it. Claims of miraculous stories (58 per cent) also repelled non-believers.

The biggest problems Australians have with the church is abuse by the clergy (cited by 91 per cent), hypocrisy and judging others (both 88 per cent) religious wars (83 per cent) and issues around money (87 per cent).

When it comes to church teachings, the main objections are its ideas about homosexuality (69 per cent), hell and condemnation (66 per cent), and the role of women and suffering (both 60 per cent). But 52 per cent were open to philosophical discussion and debating ideas; 54 per cent were impressed by people who lived out a genuine faith, and 60 per cent acknowledged a personal trauma or significant life change might change their attitude to religion.

About 40 per cent of Australians consider themselves Christian, compared with the 2006 census response of 64 per cent, the survey shows. Another 10 per cent identify with other religions; 19 per cent call themselves spiritual but not religious, and 31 per cent identify as having no religion or spiritual belief. Of those who identify with a religion, about half say they don’t actively practise it.

Read more here.

The 2011 census showed the following breakdown.

• Catholics 5,439,268
  
• No religion 4,796,787
  
• Anglican 3,679,907
  
• Uniting Church 1,065,795
  
• Presbyterian and Reformed 599,515
  
• Hindu 275,535
  
  

continue

People professing to have no religion have moved past Anglicans to become the second-largest grouping after Catholics in the 2011 Census.

Almost 4.8 million people said they had no religion, up 29 per cent from 2006, but the number of people not answering the question dropped by 2 per cent. This suggested that more people were claiming a religious identity (including no religion), said Monash University sociology professor Gary Bouma.

The total Christian population is 13.2 million, or 61 per cent, down three percentage points. Catholics have dropped half a percentage point to 25.3 or 5.4 million, Anglicans are down 1.6 percentage points to 3.7 million, while the Uniting Church is down to 5 per cent, or 1.1 million people.

Minority religions all showed strong growth, particularly Hindus, whose numbers nearly doubled to 276,000, from 0.7% to 1.3%. Buddhists have risen from 2.1 per cent to 2.5 per cent, Muslims from 1.7 per cent to 2.2 per cent. Professor Bouma said Hindu growth was due to migration, and the recent Muslim growth was due to continued migration from south Asia and a high birth rate.

‘‘The rise in ‘no religion’ continues its historic trend, even in the face of an apparent small rise in claiming a religious identity. So polarisation is increasing,’’ Professor Bouma said.

In five of eight states and territories, no religion provides the largest group. In Victoria and Queensland it is second, behind Catholics, and in NSW it is third, also behind Anglicans.

An interesting development is in the groups coming next in each state and capital city. In Sydney, Muslims have passed Eastern Orthodox into fourth place with 4.7 per cent, but for the state of NSW Islam is fifth, following the Uniting Church.

In Melbourne the Eastern Orthodox are fourth (5.5 per cent) and Buddhists fifth (4 per cent), while statewide in Victoria the Uniting Church leapfrogs the Orthodox into fourth.

In all other states and capital cities the Uniting Church is fourth. In Queensland and Brisbane, Presbyterians take fifth spot. In Western Australia undefined Christians have replaced Presbyterians in fifth position but in both Perth and Canberra it is Buddhists who have displaced Presbyterians. Presbyterians keep fifth place in Tasmania, including Hobart.

In Adelaide Orthodox Christians take fifth spot, while for the whole state Lutherans are fifth, as they are in Darwin and the Northern Territory.

UPDATED COMMENTS DECEMBER 2013



In the past 100 years, the number of Australians reporting on the national census that they have “no religion” has jumped from one in 250 in 1911 to more than one in five in 2011.

In addition, many of those who nominate a religious affiliation do not actively participate in religious activities.

The latest Australian Bureau of Statistics social trends report provides the first in-depth look at the 2011 census data on religion.

“Rates of reporting no religion have been steadily rising, and Australia is not alone in this – rates are also rising for countries like New Zealand, England and Wales, Canada, the United States and Ireland,” said ABS Director of Social and Progress Reporting Fiona Dowsley.

While 4.8 million, or 22 per cent, of Australians reported “no religion” in the 2011 census, 25 per cent nominated as Catholic, and 17 per cent as Anglicans.

On present trends, “no religion” will be the most popular response by the next census.

About half of those reporting no religious belief are less than 30 years old.

Almost a third of 22 to 24- year-olds reported no religion, and about one in five children under 15 live in a home where one or both parents reported no religion.

The ranks of non-believers also increases with higher education, with almost a third of those older than 19 with postgraduate qualifications reporting no religion compared with one in five of those with only a school education.

Since the specific instruction of writing “none” if a person has no religion was added to the census in 1971, the number of people reporting no religion has increased an average of four percentage points a decade, with the sharpest rise – 6.8 percentage points – taking place in the past decade.

The Atheist Foundation of Australia encouraged people to report “no religion” on their 2011 census forms.

But Australia’s rising rate of non-believers also reflects global trends.

The ABS report found that the rising numbers of non-believers mirrors a steady decline in people reporting Christian beliefs, while those professing other beliefs, including Hinduism, Islam and Buddhism, were on the rise.

The fall in Christian beliefs has driven an increase in civil marriages, with seven in 10 marriages now conducted by a civil celebrant.

The report found non-believers are slightly less likely to do volunteer work (17 per cent) than people with Christian beliefs (20 per cent) but more likely than those with other beliefs (14 per cent).

The 2010 General Social Survey found that only 15 per cent of men and 22 per cent of women had actively participated in a religious or spiritual group.

peter.mickelburough@news.com.au

http://theaimn.com/2013/12/31/the-future-of-christian-faith-in-australia-updated/

Women dont go to church as men dont want churchies. The reason men didnt want churchies in the first place is their arrogance!

I cant see christianity dying out though as you will always have people hoping to be less poor and needing something to give them strength to carry on.

Most people like the positive messages of the bible and are comforted by them but simply refuse to go to church as it makes them contradict themselves if they wish to be seen as normal in todays society.....BUT THEY SAY EVERY COMPLEX SYSTEM NEEDS A REVERBERATING SYSTEM! ( mind you they also say reverberating systems do have their limits so i suppose the thread does ask a legitimate question afterall  :-? )

;)

Christianity has been dying out in most Western countries for a while, particularity the North West and their cousin states. This isn't any secret or new news. But, the interesting thing is that Christianity is growing in the non-West. Particularly Africa, South America, and some Asian states.

Secularisation is a Western phenomenon and cannot be understood with understanding the Enlightenment and the growth of the empirical sciences.

not reading that but yeah it is in western countries

nobody i know my age cares about religion

I always have a soft spot for Roman Catholicism. (Well I married one). People like Father Bob Maguire provide inspiration by acting out their beliefs and inspiring people.

They make US evangelists look really shabby by comparison.

Reasons highlighted in previous posts for the lack of religious attendance or belief in Christianity are valid. I would highlight the fact that people now use Saturday nights as recreation or work purposes to the point that they don't want to get up to attend a service. Why would anyone want to attend a church that preaches how they must be boring people to get in to heaven?

UnSubRocky wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 3:02pm:

Why would anyone want to attend a church that preaches how they must be boring people to get in to heaven?

It seems to be working fine for Islam and Judaism.  But then, jews and muslims aren't selling themselves out.

I thought Islam promoted conquering other lands and killing off the infidels?

Not religious myself.

I found this a good read:

http://alaindebotton.com/religion/

And when they're not conquering, they're praying 5 times a day.  Actually, they pray 5 times a day even when they are conquering.  And none of these religious dorks drink - they're all as boring as each other.

Do they have set times of when they pray? I was in the cinema a couple years ago, and I was on my way out of the restrooms there. Some guy was facing east, kneeling just outside the lavatory, and he finished up his pray with the usual "shoulders, head, it's good" signal with his hands. I walked a little quicker to the exit thinking that we might lose the cinema for the sake of his postmortem booty call. But it did get me wondering if he took time out to thank Allah during a session of a movie.

UnSubRocky wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 3:56pm:

Do they have set times of when they pray? I was in the cinema a couple years ago, and I was on my way out of the restrooms there. Some guy was facing east, kneeling just outside the lavatory, and he finished up his pray with the usual "shoulders, head, it's good" signal with his hands. I walked a little quicker to the exit thinking that we might lose the cinema for the sake of his postmortem booty call. But it did get me wondering if he took time out to thank Allah during a session of a movie.

I've seen them stop their cars in Sydney traffic, and get out and start praying on the road.

Praying they don't get hit by a bus, I assume.

I think they call those moments "self-fulfilling prophesies".

Religion is for the mentally ill, hard to believe its 2014 and there are still religious people about, humans are crazy   :D

John S wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 7:45am:

However, the main reason for the decline in belief I would suggest is the fact that children are now better educated than their parents. Today’s generation questions everything. Coupled with a simple access to information on the internet it is now easy to reason and question traditional problematic belief.

I think that this is the key.
As we have become better educated and taught critical and logical thinking skills, we have become less religious.

Indoctrination from a young age also plays a role however which is why the US is more religious than Australia despite being well educated. It is also why they are so keen to get creationism taught in science classes.

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 10:49am:

John S wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 7:45am: However, the main reason for the decline in belief I would suggest is the fact that children are now better educated than their parents. Today’s generation questions everything. Coupled with a simple access to information on the internet it is now easy to reason and question traditional problematic belief. I think that this is the key. As we have become better educated and taught critical and logical thinking skills, we have become less religious.

I am not so sure of this. Maybe in some respects, like technological advances, but I doubt critical and logical thinking skills have become more prevalent. For example, I doubt very much most people even understand how Christianity was argued for, and who argued for it. Today's critique of religion is a simplistic one: I can't see it therefore it doesn't exist. This is a straightforward, hard materialist approach. Do today's anti-religious even understand the materialist paradigm they use? Do they understand the history of conflict between the idealists and materialists? I very much doubt it.

I doubt it too. 

Christianity might be dying out, but the human emotion that fueled it sure isn't.  We can see the same fervour of old school religious faith applied to new ideologies.  Examples include atheists, climate change and equality nuts. 

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 11:23am:

I doubt very much most people even understand how Christianity was argued for, and who argued for it. Today's critique of religion is a simplistic one: I can't see it therefore it doesn't exist. This is a straightforward, hard materialist approach.

I think you are the one being simplistic.
"I can't see it therefore it doesn't exist" is just one of your many strawman arguments.
My own atheism is far more deeply based than that.


Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 11:23am:

Do today's anti-religious even understand the materialist paradigm they use? Do they understand the history of conflict between the idealists and materialists? I very much doubt it.

That would only have relevance if atheism was a "movement" or a "religion" in it's own right, but it isn't. Atheism is simply the absence of religion. So your comment is really just psuedo philosophical BS.

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 4:00pm:

UnSubRocky wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 3:56pm: Do they have set times of when they pray? I was in the cinema a couple years ago, and I was on my way out of the restrooms there. Some guy was facing east, kneeling just outside the lavatory, and he finished up his pray with the usual "shoulders, head, it's good" signal with his hands. I walked a little quicker to the exit thinking that we might lose the cinema for the sake of his postmortem booty call. But it did get me wondering if he took time out to thank Allah during a session of a movie. I've seen them stop their cars in Sydney traffic, and get out and start praying on the road. Praying they don't get hit by a bus, I assume.

Are you serious?

Quote:

Atheism is simply the absence of religion.

Professed atheism is a reliable indicator that that person also believes in a suite of other "isms".  "Atheist" is just the label applied to recognise that suite of "isms" (aka movement, cult or religion) even though it doesn't equate perfectly with "Atheism" in a strictly literal sense.

... wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 1:19pm:

Quote: Atheism is simply the absence of religion. Professed atheism is a reliable indicator that that person also believes in a suite of other "isms".  "Atheist" is just the label applied to recognise that suite of "isms" (aka movement, cult or religion) even though it doesn't equate perfectly with "Atheism" in a strictly literal sense.

The point is most people don't profess atheism: sticky beaks apply such labels!

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 2:00pm:

... wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 1:19pm: Quote: Atheism is simply the absence of religion. Professed atheism is a reliable indicator that that person also believes in a suite of other "isms".  "Atheist" is just the label applied to recognise that suite of "isms" (aka movement, cult or religion) even though it doesn't equate perfectly with "Atheism" in a strictly literal sense. The point is most people don't profess atheism: sticky beaks apply such labels!

Most people don't because most people aren't atheists.

Most atheists love to shout about their atheism, in the same way the morally self-righteous vicars wife loves to shout about how prim and proper she is.

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 12:40pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 11:23am: I doubt very much most people even understand how Christianity was argued for, and who argued for it. Today's critique of religion is a simplistic one: I can't see it therefore it doesn't exist. This is a straightforward, hard materialist approach.  I think you are the one being simplistic. "I can't see it therefore it doesn't exist" is just one of your many strawman arguments. My own atheism is far more deeply based than that.

Perhaps you can explain it for us then.




Quote:

That would only have relevance if atheism was a "movement" or a "religion" in it's own right, but it isn't. Atheism is simply the absence of religion. So your comment is really just psuedo philosophical BS.

2,000 years of philosophy and theology dismissed as pseudo bullsh*t eh? Didn't you just state something about critical and logical thinking skills? It appears you have little.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 2:04pm:

Quote: That would only have relevance if atheism was a "movement" or a "religion" in it's own right, but it isn't. Atheism is simply the absence of religion. So your comment is really just psuedo philosophical BS. 2,000 years of philosophy and theology dismissed as pseudo bullsh*t eh?

No. I was referring to your comment as psuedo philosophical BS.


Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 2:04pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 12:40pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 11:23am: I doubt very much most people even understand how Christianity was argued for, and who argued for it. Today's critique of religion is a simplistic one: I can't see it therefore it doesn't exist. This is a straightforward, hard materialist approach.  I think you are the one being simplistic. "I can't see it therefore it doesn't exist" is just one of your many strawman arguments. My own atheism is far more deeply based than that. Perhaps you can explain it for us then.

Ok I will list them

- There is no evidence of a creator, and one of the basic rules is that who ever makes a claim is the one with the responsibility to provide evidence to back it up.

But there is also plenty of evidence against religion.

- There is no consistency between the different religions. They all have have different beliefs, different Gods and the great majority of people inherit the same religion as their family/peers.
This is evidence that Religion is purely a cultural phenomenon
- There is no consistency with in the same religion. In Christianity there are Cathlics, Protestants and Orthodox and all these are split into their separate groups.
Some Christians believe in Hell, some don't. Some believe the Bible is literal fact, some don't.
They can't all be right, which makes it quite likely that they all are wrong.
- Why is there no evidence of religion in animals? Most of them have mating rituals, nesting rituals, why are there no religious rituals?
- Why do bad things happen to innocent people? As an example, over 200,000 people were killed in the 2004 Tsunami which is basically an act of God. They were of all religious faiths and many were innocent Children.
- Why do people use their faith to justify doing horrendous things? Such as muslim terrorism or the Spanish inquisition or the ethnic cleansing in Serbia.

And then there is the reason that religion started in the first place

- primitive man lived in a strange and frightening world. To try and understand it he created religion to explain how the world was created and how it operated. As time has gone on and we have become more technologically and scientifically skilled. All the superstitions have been replaced by our understanding of how things work.
Natural mechanisms explain how the universe work and there is evidence of this everywhere. Every time a doctor operates on a patient, every time a solar eclipse happens precisely where and when it was predicted, every time you use your car or your computer it is evidence that these scientific principles work. 

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 1:01pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 4:00pm: UnSubRocky wrote on Dec 31st, 2013 at 3:56pm: Do they have set times of when they pray? I was in the cinema a couple years ago, and I was on my way out of the restrooms there. Some guy was facing east, kneeling just outside the lavatory, and he finished up his pray with the usual "shoulders, head, it's good" signal with his hands. I walked a little quicker to the exit thinking that we might lose the cinema for the sake of his postmortem booty call. But it did get me wondering if he took time out to thank Allah during a session of a movie. I've seen them stop their cars in Sydney traffic, and get out and start praying on the road. Praying they don't get hit by a bus, I assume. Are you serious?

Absolutely.

I've seen it happen twice.

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2014 at 8:45pm:

Ok I will list them - There is no evidence of a creator, and one of the basic rules is that who ever makes a claim is the one with the responsibility to provide evidence to back it up.

No physical evidence you mean? If so, that's the materialist paradigm I was speaking about.


Quote:

But there is also plenty of evidence against religion. - There is no consistency between the different religions. They all have have different beliefs, different Gods and the great majority of people inherit the same religion as their family/peers. This is evidence that Religion is purely a cultural phenomenon

Maybe there are several gods?


Quote:

- There is no consistency with in the same religion. In Christianity there are Cathlics, Protestants and Orthodox and all these are split into their separate groups. Some Christians believe in Hell, some don't. Some believe the Bible is literal fact, some don't. They can't all be right, which makes it quite likely that they all are wrong.

Okay, but this doesn't necessarily mean there is no god. It's merely a disagreement on their conceptions of god.




Quote:

- Why is there no evidence of religion in animals? Most of them have mating rituals, nesting rituals, why are there no religious rituals?

Not sure. Maybe you'll have to ask god.


Quote:

- Why do bad things happen to innocent people? As an example, over 200,000 people were killed in the 2004 Tsunami which is basically an act of God. They were of all religious faiths and many were innocent Children.

Maybe he's not a moral god. The pagan gods and the pre-Christian Jewish god had little concern for human life.


Quote:

- Why do people use their faith to justify doing horrendous things? Such as muslim terrorism or the Spanish inquisition or the ethnic cleansing in Serbia.

I put this down to biology. Human beings will fight regardless. They will always make excuses to fight over things. It's our fate.


Quote:

And then there is the reason that religion started in the first place - primitive man lived in a strange and frightening world. To try and understand it he created religion to explain how the world was created and how it operated. As time has gone on and we have become more technologically and scientifically skilled. All the superstitions have been replaced by our understanding of how things work. Natural mechanisms explain how the universe work and there is evidence of this everywhere. Every time a doctor operates on a patient, every time a solar eclipse happens precisely where and when it was predicted, every time you use your car or your computer it is evidence that these scientific principles work.

Okay. I agree that religions try to simply a strange world and make it knowable and meaningful for us. But I am still not convinced god has been completely debunked through modern science. Science only explains and harnesses causes and effects. Nature and its forces already exist before man starts explaining them and using them for his own ends.


With all that said, I am not religious, I am an agnostic. The only religion I could take seriously would be pantheism. 

... wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 11:29am:

I doubt it too.  Christianity might be dying out, but the human emotion that fueled it sure isn't.  We can see the same fervour of old school religious faith applied to new ideologies.  Examples include atheists, climate change and equality nuts.

Really? When was an atheist last knocking on your door trying to get you to "convert"? They arent even a group . . .

SOB

... wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 2:02pm:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 2:00pm: ... wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 1:19pm: Quote: Atheism is simply the absence of religion. Professed atheism is a reliable indicator that that person also believes in a suite of other "isms".  "Atheist" is just the label applied to recognise that suite of "isms" (aka movement, cult or religion) even though it doesn't equate perfectly with "Atheism" in a strictly literal sense. The point is most people don't profess atheism: sticky beaks apply such labels! Most people don't because most people aren't atheists. Most atheists love to shout about their atheism, in the same way the morally self-righteous vicars wife loves to shout about how prim and proper she is.

Where are your stats? I havent heard any athiests shouting about their atheism unless provoked by a god botherer. . .and even then its usually "leave me alone im atheist" which is hardly shouting.

SOB

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 11:23am:

Today's critique of religion is a simplistic one: I can't see it therefore it doesn't exist. This is a straightforward, hard materialist approach. Do today's anti-religious even understand the materialist paradigm they use? Do they understand the history of conflict between the idealists and materialists? I very much doubt it.

I've never met anybody who claims that religion doesn't exist. (OK, I couldn't resist it  ;D )

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2014 at 11:04pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 2nd, 2014 at 8:45pm: Ok I will list them - There is no evidence of a creator, and one of the basic rules is that who ever makes a claim is the one with the responsibility to provide evidence to back it up. No physical evidence you mean? If so, that's the materialist paradigm I was speaking about.

But it's not the only evidence.


Quote:

Maybe there are several gods? Okay, but this doesn't necessarily mean there is no god. It's merely a disagreement on their conceptions of god. Not sure. Maybe you'll have to ask god. Maybe he's not a moral god. The pagan gods and the pre-Christian Jewish god had little concern for human life.

I accept that no single peice of evidence is proof that God doesn't exist. I can't prove it absolutely.
However the weight of the evidence leads me to the conclusion that, beyond reasonable doubt, there is no God 

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 7:37am:

However the weight of the evidence leads me to the conclusion that, beyond reasonable doubt, there is no God

Very good.  But now you're back at the starting point - the question of "how did we get here and what does it all mean" that led man to create religion in the first place.

... wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 7:41am:

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 7:37am: However the weight of the evidence leads me to the conclusion that, beyond reasonable doubt, there is no God Very good.  But now you're back at the starting point - the question of "how did we get here and what does it all mean" that led man to create religion in the first place.

How did we get here? - we've already got explanations for how the stars and planets formed and how life evolved to humans. There are still some gaps in our understanding but given nothing else has had the requirement of a "creator" then I see no reason why we shouldn't be able to explain these as natural processes as well.

What does it all mean? - why does there have to be a meaning? We live and then we die. It's up to us to make the most of our time here.

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 7:55am:

... wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 7:41am: The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 7:37am: However the weight of the evidence leads me to the conclusion that, beyond reasonable doubt, there is no God Very good.  But now you're back at the starting point - the question of "how did we get here and what does it all mean" that led man to create religion in the first place. How did we get here? - we've already got explanations for how the stars and planets formed and how life evolved to humans. There are still some gaps in our understanding but given nothing else has had the requirement of a "creator" then I see no reason why we shouldn't be able to explain these as natural processes as well.

It's a very poor, patchy explanation.  It doesn't explain what life is and where it came from.  It doesn't explain where matter came from. 


Quote:

What does it all mean? - why does there have to be a meaning? We live and then we die. It's up to us to make the most of our time here.

That's not enough for a lot of people.  If there is no point, and your life is just endless suffering, it doesn't exactly fill people with the hope needed to endure. 

If there wasn't this need for some higher purpose/power in so many people, religion would have no traction....and yet most of the world follows some religion or other.  I don't think it's a coincidence that the vast majority of the worlds atheists are from the pampered, bloated western countries.  When the prosperity ends, watch for a huge resurgence of religion.

... wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 8:04am:

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 7:55am: ... wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 7:41am: The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 7:37am: However the weight of the evidence leads me to the conclusion that, beyond reasonable doubt, there is no God Very good.  But now you're back at the starting point - the question of "how did we get here and what does it all mean" that led man to create religion in the first place. How did we get here? - we've already got explanations for how the stars and planets formed and how life evolved to humans. There are still some gaps in our understanding but given nothing else has had the requirement of a "creator" then I see no reason why we shouldn't be able to explain these as natural processes as well. It's a very poor, patchy explanation.  It doesn't explain what life is and where it came from.  It doesn't explain where matter came from.

I just gave a summary because i don't think many people would be interested in pages of scientific theory, and anyway, the other explanation would require the question "who made God and where did he come from?"



Quote:

That's not enough for a lot of people.  If there is no point, and your life is just endless suffering, it doesn't exactly fill people with the hope needed to endure.  If there wasn't this need for some higher purpose/power in so many people, religion would have no traction....and yet most of the world follows some religion or other.

I totally agree. But just because people want a meaning to their lives that doesn't mean that there is one.

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 9:25am:

I totally agree. But just because people want a meaning to their lives that doesn't mean that there is one.

True, but the fact that they want one ensures that religion, or other sublimation of that need, will continue. 

The human universals  include several religious or related practices. Universal behaviour doesn't go away when one proclaims themselves an atheist, it just gets sublimated into other forms.  Yesteryears puritanical christians are the same as todays equality crusaders - zealous, unquestioning drones intent on converting the world to the "real truth" - theirs.

The xtian religion (and all the others) need to die out because they are outdated primitive things that the human race should have outgrown by now.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 9:48am:

The xtian religion (and all the others) need to die out because they are outdated primitive things that the human race should have outgrown by now. SOB

Says the old man who lives in his friends flat and worships cats. You are the last person to talk about out growing anything.

Quantum wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 10:26am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:48am: The xtian religion (and all the others) need to die out because they are outdated primitive things that the human race should have outgrown by now. SOB Says the old man who lives in his friends flat and worships cats. You are the last person to talk about out growing anything.

Go away troll - and i dont live there anymore - it was temporary.

Nothing to say on topic then?

SOB

... wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 9:37am:

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:25am: I totally agree. But just because people want a meaning to their lives that doesn't mean that there is one. True, but the fact that they want one ensures that religion, or other sublimation of that need, will continue.  The human universals  include several religious or related practices. Universal behaviour doesn't go away when one proclaims themselves an atheist, it just gets sublimated into other forms.  Yesteryears puritanical christians are the same as todays equality crusaders - zealous, unquestioning drones intent on converting the world to the "real truth" - theirs.

There are people like that on both sides of politics. It relates more to their own passion than the subject matter itself.

Your "human universals" link is an interesting one which i will have to study at more length. At first glance I can say that I have no "soul concept" as i don't beleive in a soul.......and what the hell is "weather control"?

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 2^nd, 2014 at 8:45pm:

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 2:04pm: Quote: That would only have relevance if atheism was a "movement" or a "religion" in it's own right, but it isn't. Atheism is simply the absence of religion. So your comment is really just psuedo philosophical BS. 2,000 years of philosophy and theology dismissed as pseudo bullsh*t eh? No. I was referring to your comment as psuedo philosophical BS. Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 2:04pm: The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 12:40pm: Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 11:23am: I doubt very much most people even understand how Christianity was argued for, and who argued for it. Today's critique of religion is a simplistic one: I can't see it therefore it doesn't exist. This is a straightforward, hard materialist approach.  I think you are the one being simplistic. "I can't see it therefore it doesn't exist" is just one of your many strawman arguments. My own atheism is far more deeply based than that. Perhaps you can explain it for us then. Ok I will list them - There is no evidence of a creator, and one of the basic rules is that who ever makes a claim is the one with the responsibility to provide evidence to back it up. But there is also plenty of evidence against religion. - There is no consistency between the different religions. They all have have different beliefs, different Gods and the great majority of people inherit the same religion as their family/peers. This is evidence that Religion is purely a cultural phenomenon - There is no consistency with in the same religion. In Christianity there are Cathlics, Protestants and Orthodox and all these are split into their separate groups. Some Christians believe in Hell, some don't. Some believe the Bible is literal fact, some don't. They can't all be right, which makes it quite likely that they all are wrong. - Why is there no evidence of religion in animals? Most of them have mating rituals, nesting rituals, why are there no religious rituals? - Why do bad things happen to innocent people? As an example, over 200,000 people were killed in the 2004 Tsunami which is basically an act of God. They were of all religious faiths and many were innocent Children. - Why do people use their faith to justify doing horrendous things? Such as muslim terrorism or the Spanish inquisition or the ethnic cleansing in Serbia. And then there is the reason that religion started in the first place - primitive man lived in a strange and frightening world. To try and understand it he created religion to explain how the world was created and how it operated. As time has gone on and we have become more technologically and scientifically skilled. All the superstitions have been replaced by our understanding of how things work. Natural mechanisms explain how the universe work and there is evidence of this everywhere. Every time a doctor operates on a patient, every time a solar eclipse happens precisely where and when it was predicted, every time you use your car or your computer it is evidence that these scientific principles work.

Quote:

....- There is no evidence of a creator, and one of the basic rules is that who ever makes a claim is the one with the responsibility to provide evidence to back it up. ...

the lack of 'ongoing' evolution suggests all the different species were created as they basically are now.
eg, horses started to 'evolve' 20 million years ago.
What happened to the ones that 'started to evolve' 10 million and 5 million or 1 million years ago?
How come there are no 1/2 created species ?


Quote:

.......There is no consistency between the different religions. They all have have different beliefs, different Gods and the great majority of people inherit the same religion as their family/peers. This is evidence that Religion is purely a cultural phenomenon - There is no consistency with in the same religion. In Christianity there are Cathlics, Protestants and Orthodox and all these are split into their separate groups. Some Christians believe in Hell, some don't. Some believe the Bible is literal fact, some don't. They can't all be right, which makes it quite likely that they all are wrong......

We all have our own free will


Quote:

........All the superstitions have been replaced by our understanding of how things work. Natural mechanisms explain how the universe work and there is evidence of this everywhere. Every time a doctor operates on a patient, every time a solar eclipse happens precisely where and when it was predicted, every time you use your car or your computer it is evidence that these scientific principles work.  ..

we are capable of learning

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 12:09pm:

the lack of 'ongoing' evolution suggests all the different species were created as they basically are now. eg, horses started to 'evolve' 20 million years ago. What happened to the ones that 'started to evolve' 10 million and 5 million or 1 million years ago? How come there are no 1/2 created species ?

Every breed of dog has evolved from wolves in just 30,000 years.  Give them 10 million years and who knows how some of them would look.

DID YOU KNOW?....


The five fastest growing religions by conversions (new adherents per year, in millions):

1.      Christianity      2,501,396
2.      Islam      865,558
3.      Buddhism      156,609
4.      Sikhism      28,961
5.      Baha'is      26,333

• Christianity is the fastest growing religion both in the number of new adherents due to natural growth (births minus deaths) as well as in number of new converts (converts in minus converts out).

• The total growth of Christianity (25,210,195) adds the equivalent of more than the population of Australia (21,555,500) or the U.S. State of Texas (23,904,380) of new Christians to Christianity. Every year.

• The number of new converts to Christianity is more than twice the combined number of new converts to all the other tabulated religions, even if we take out those with negative numbers (2,501,396 vers. 1,090,541).

http://fastestgrowingreligion.com/numbers.html

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 5:49am:

... wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 2:02pm: BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 2:00pm: ... wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 1:19pm: Quote: Atheism is simply the absence of religion. Professed atheism is a reliable indicator that that person also believes in a suite of other "isms".  "Atheist" is just the label applied to recognise that suite of "isms" (aka movement, cult or religion) even though it doesn't equate perfectly with "Atheism" in a strictly literal sense. The point is most people don't profess atheism: sticky beaks apply such labels! Most people don't because most people aren't atheists. Most atheists love to shout about their atheism, in the same way the morally self-righteous vicars wife loves to shout about how prim and proper she is. Where are your stats? I havent heard any athiests shouting about their atheism unless provoked by a god botherer. . .and even then its usually "leave me alone im atheist" which is hardly shouting. SOB

What world do you live in?

http://www.russianchurchcheltenham.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/2971673126_c4514e6752.jpg

http://www.atheistconvention.org.au/wp-content/themes/GAC-2012/images/logo.jpg

http://atheistbillboards.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Secular_Nation_Monument_Design_fw.jpg

http://bookshop.blackwell.co.uk/images/jackets/l/05/0593055489.jpg

http://thumbs.policymic.com/gi26Gn-OC3YoUq6SDw9c77kGwqI=/178x0:3111x1849/1910x1000/s3.amazonaws.com/policymic-images/dbfed49dd8088d8d4610eb88142ae710bf618e5bd1910c7b72d717420477aa3c.jpg

and who could forget this proposal;

https://architizercdn.s3.amazonaws.com/thumbnails-PRODUCTION/3b/29/3b29b18e12a03fc6555f6f96f7b0f4ef.jpg

http://www.listener.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/debottontemplesite.jpg

Accept it. There are many atheist who are grouping together to create a position of agreement; Something that atheist stand for and will promote. There are many atheist who are out there pushing their worldview and trying to attack any view that has any hint of spiritual or faith foundation. Here is a group of them celebrating their atheism while they indoctrinate young children into their beliefs;

http://binaryapi.ap.org/bc1e6c934feb499badb2c1bd58f2245e/512x.jpg


Through this approach Atheist have hijacked words such as "reason", "logic", and of course "science". You yourself are a perfect example of an uneducated idiot who thinks he is enlightened because he doesn't believe in a God. 

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 11:08am:

... wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:37am: The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:25am: I totally agree. But just because people want a meaning to their lives that doesn't mean that there is one. True, but the fact that they want one ensures that religion, or other sublimation of that need, will continue.  The human universals  include several religious or related practices. Universal behaviour doesn't go away when one proclaims themselves an atheist, it just gets sublimated into other forms.  Yesteryears puritanical christians are the same as todays equality crusaders - zealous, unquestioning drones intent on converting the world to the "real truth" - theirs. There are people like that on both sides of politics. It relates more to their own passion than the subject matter itself.

Yes, there is.  But weak people will identify with whatever the strongest influence acting upon them is.  Obviously there are idiots of all flavours, but the most powerful influence in a society will have the biggest total number of idiots supporting it. 

When we were a christian society, these compliant personalities would be among the most hardcore and vocal christians.  Now that we're a secular society, they are among the most hardcore and vocal secularists.  Far from being a triumph of "logic and reason" it's a demonstration of the same illogical, irrational herd mentality that saw witches burned at the stake. 

Thats just humour quantum. There is no atheist religion. If 1 or 2 want to take the mickey thats their thing. If some religious nut wants to pretend to be atheist and try to start a religion thats their thing. Atheism is just a lack of belief in any of your fairy tale invisible ppl.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 3:51pm:

Thats just humour quantum. There is no atheist religion. If 1 or 2 want to take the mickey thats their thing. If some religious nut wants to pretend to be atheist and try to start a religion thats their thing. Atheism is just a lack of belief in any of your fairy tale invisible ppl. SOB

People spend money to make slogans on shirts and pay to put it on buses. Some take the time to write books. Others go the effort and expense to make monuments to atheism. Still others organize international conferences about it. All along millions partakes and support these endeavours...

...But spoty says it all just humour and no one actually agrees with it. ::)

Even better yet, the cat says;

"If some religious nut wants to pretend to be atheist and try to start a religion thats their thing"

so now even the hardcore atheist (which he is clearly one of) are actually religious nuts in disguise. An atheist who promotes his atheism isn't actually an atheist. Wonderful stuff! 

I wonder if you would extend that same logic to any religious institute? I reckon when some Christian goes and makes a dick of himself or does something horrid, you will be one of the first to say "look what this Christian did". I doubt we would ever hear you say "he says he is a Christian, but he obvious isn't and does not represent Christians as a whole". Nup, can't picture that for a second.

Quantum wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 4:05pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 3:51pm: Thats just humour quantum. There is no atheist religion. If 1 or 2 want to take the mickey thats their thing. If some religious nut wants to pretend to be atheist and try to start a religion thats their thing. Atheism is just a lack of belief in any of your fairy tale invisible ppl. SOB People spend money to make slogans on shirts and pay to put it on buses. Some take the time to write books. Others go the effort and expense to make monuments to atheism. Still others organize international conferences about it. All along millions partakes and support these endeavours... ...But spoty says it all just humour and no one actually agrees with it. ::) Even better yet, the cat says; "If some religious nut wants to pretend to be atheist and try to start a religion thats their thing" so now even the hardcore atheist (which he is clearly one of) are actually religious nuts in disguise. An atheist who promotes his atheism isn't actually an atheist. Wonderful stuff!  I wonder if you would extend that same logic to any religious institute? I reckon when some Christian goes and makes a dick of himself or does something horrid, you will be one of the first to say "look what this Christian did". I doubt we would ever hear you say "he says he is a Christian, but he obvious isn't and does not represent Christians as a whole". Nup, can't picture that for a second.

Well thats because you dont read posts properly and only see what you want to see

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 4:54pm:

Quantum wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 4:05pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 3:51pm: Thats just humour quantum. There is no atheist religion. If 1 or 2 want to take the mickey thats their thing. If some religious nut wants to pretend to be atheist and try to start a religion thats their thing. Atheism is just a lack of belief in any of your fairy tale invisible ppl. SOB People spend money to make slogans on shirts and pay to put it on buses. Some take the time to write books. Others go the effort and expense to make monuments to atheism. Still others organize international conferences about it. All along millions partakes and support these endeavours... ...But spoty says it all just humour and no one actually agrees with it. ::) Even better yet, the cat says; "If some religious nut wants to pretend to be atheist and try to start a religion thats their thing" so now even the hardcore atheist (which he is clearly one of) are actually religious nuts in disguise. An atheist who promotes his atheism isn't actually an atheist. Wonderful stuff!  I wonder if you would extend that same logic to any religious institute? I reckon when some Christian goes and makes a dick of himself or does something horrid, you will be one of the first to say "look what this Christian did". I doubt we would ever hear you say "he says he is a Christian, but he obvious isn't and does not represent Christians as a whole". Nup, can't picture that for a second. Well thats because you dont read posts properly and only see what you want to see SOB

Classic spot stuff. Write BS, have it debunked, turn around and blame people for not reading your post correctly. Yes, the bad old days are once again upon us...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJRABlQTJA0

There is no god without humanity.
There is no humanity without god.
There is no world without humanity and god.
The world is a joint creation by humanity and god.

Soren wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 9:06pm:

There is no humanity without god

Not so sure about that one

http://list25.com/25-most-brutal-torture-techniques-ever-devised/

what a lovely fellow god turned out to be!

John Smith wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 9:18pm:

Soren wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:06pm: There is no humanity without god Not so sure about that one http://list25.com/25-most-brutal-torture-techniques-ever-devised/ what a lovely fellow god turned out to be!

Did he devise those techniques?

Anyway, you are missing the point - god is not in a world that doesn't also have humans.
The world is a joint venture. Not by god alone, not by man alone. Together.

Soren wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 9:22pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:18pm: Soren wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:06pm: There is no humanity without god Not so sure about that one http://list25.com/25-most-brutal-torture-techniques-ever-devised/ what a lovely fellow god turned out to be! Did he devise those techniques? Anyway, you are missing the point - god is not in a world that doesn't also have humans. The world is a joint venture. Not by god alone, not by man alone. Together.

god is creation of humans ....

John Smith wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 9:24pm:

Soren wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:22pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:18pm: Soren wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:06pm: There is no humanity without god Not so sure about that one http://list25.com/25-most-brutal-torture-techniques-ever-devised/ what a lovely fellow god turned out to be! Did he devise those techniques? Anyway, you are missing the point - god is not in a world that doesn't also have humans. The world is a joint venture. Not by god alone, not by man alone. Together. god is creation of humans ....

God is inherent in humans. he dwells in humans. He doesn't dwell anywhere else.
But isn't a human creation.


Stories, imagination, poetry are inherent in humans - even if YOU personally have never made a poem and are devoid of any imagination and could never tell even a joke.

It is not about YOU and your own limits.

Soren wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 9:29pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:24pm: Soren wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:22pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:18pm: Soren wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:06pm: There is no humanity without god Not so sure about that one http://list25.com/25-most-brutal-torture-techniques-ever-devised/ what a lovely fellow god turned out to be! Did he devise those techniques? Anyway, you are missing the point - god is not in a world that doesn't also have humans. The world is a joint venture. Not by god alone, not by man alone. Together. god is creation of humans .... God is inherent in humans.

not all humans

John Smith wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 9:31pm:

not all humans

;D ;D

What makes YOU so special?

Soren wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 9:33pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:31pm: not all humans ;D ;D What makes YOU so special?

i went to a catholic school .....  ;D ;D ;D ;D

John Smith wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 9:34pm:

Soren wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:33pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:31pm: not all humans ;D ;D What makes YOU so special? i went to a catholic school .....  ;D ;D ;D ;D

that makes you one of the herd...

Soren wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 9:46pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:34pm: Soren wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:33pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:31pm: not all humans ;D ;D What makes YOU so special? i went to a catholic school .....  ;D ;D ;D ;D that makes you one of the herd...

nope,  it had the opposite effect to what was intended ... proved to me what a load of codswallop it all was.

John Smith wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 9:55pm:

Soren wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:46pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:34pm: Soren wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:33pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:31pm: not all humans ;D ;D What makes YOU so special? i went to a catholic school .....  ;D ;D ;D ;D that makes you one of the herd... nope,  it had the opposite effect to what was intended ... proved to me what a load of codswallop it all was.

You mean your education was wasted on you.

... wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 12:14pm:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 12:09pm: the lack of 'ongoing' evolution suggests all the different species were created as they basically are now. eg, horses started to 'evolve' 20 million years ago. What happened to the ones that 'started to evolve' 10 million and 5 million or 1 million years ago? How come there are no 1/2 created species ? Every breed of dog has evolved from wolves in just 30,000 years.  Give them 10 million years and who knows how some of them would look.

So what happpened to the dogs that started to evolve from wolves 20,000 years ago, or 10,000 years ago, or 5000 years ago?
Where are the 1/2 wolf 1/2 chichuaua animals ?
It's like there are chichuauas, and trhere are wolves. And they are different.

Soren wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 9:57pm:

John Smith wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:55pm: Soren wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:46pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:34pm: Soren wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:33pm: John Smith wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 9:31pm: not all humans ;D ;D What makes YOU so special? i went to a catholic school .....  ;D ;D ;D ;D that makes you one of the herd... nope,  it had the opposite effect to what was intended ... proved to me what a load of codswallop it all was. You mean your education was wasted on you.

au contraire  .... It worked better than intended.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 10:50pm:

Where are the 1/2 wolf 1/2 chichuaua animals ?

the wolf ate the chichuaua after he buggered it ....  I know, the naughty wolf

And so the thread turns into a biblebashing session by the ones that are threatened over their religion dying out.

BTW john most ppl i know that went to catcholic school came out non-believers. Some of them still call themselves "non-practicing catholics" because the ingrained fear is still there though.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 4^th, 2014 at 8:02am:

And so the thread turns into a biblebashing session by the ones that are threatened over their religion dying out.

huh?  Who? Where?

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2014 at 10:50pm:

... wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 12:14pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 12:09pm: the lack of 'ongoing' evolution suggests all the different species were created as they basically are now. eg, horses started to 'evolve' 20 million years ago. What happened to the ones that 'started to evolve' 10 million and 5 million or 1 million years ago? How come there are no 1/2 created species ? Every breed of dog has evolved from wolves in just 30,000 years.  Give them 10 million years and who knows how some of them would look. So what happpened to the dogs that started to evolve from wolves 20,000 years ago, or 10,000 years ago, or 5000 years ago? Where are the 1/2 wolf 1/2 chichuaua animals ? It's like there are chichuauas, and trhere are wolves. And they are different.

About 130,000 years ago man domesticated some of the more friendly and docile wolves which were around their village. Over time, due to natural selection (only dogs which suited the needs of man were kept to breed) these wolves eventually became the domestic dogs we have today.
The divergence happened 130,000 years ago, and since that time wolves and domestic dogs have evolved independently of each other.

That is why there is no 1/2 wolf 1/2 Chihuahua animal

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 4^th, 2014 at 10:04am:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 10:50pm: ... wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 12:14pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 12:09pm: the lack of 'ongoing' evolution suggests all the different species were created as they basically are now. eg, horses started to 'evolve' 20 million years ago. What happened to the ones that 'started to evolve' 10 million and 5 million or 1 million years ago? How come there are no 1/2 created species ? Every breed of dog has evolved from wolves in just 30,000 years.  Give them 10 million years and who knows how some of them would look. So what happpened to the dogs that started to evolve from wolves 20,000 years ago, or 10,000 years ago, or 5000 years ago? Where are the 1/2 wolf 1/2 chichuaua animals ? It's like there are chichuauas, and trhere are wolves. And they are different. About 130,000 years ago man domesticated some of the more friendly and docile wolves which were around their village. Over time, due to natural selection (only dogs which suited the needs of man were kept to breed) these wolves eventually became the domestic dogs we have today. The divergence happened 130,000 years ago, and since that time wolves and domestic dogs have evolved independently of each other. That is why there is no 1/2 wolf 1/2 Chihuahua animal

How could anyone possible know this? It is hard enough knowing for sure what exactly happened just a hundred years ago let alone over a hundred thousand. Really, once we get past about 5 thousand years we really have no idea what humanity was doing. Bits and pieces here and there, but certainly nothing to the point of knowing how the locals related to wolfs in their village. 

Quantum wrote on Jan 4^th, 2014 at 10:19am:

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 4th, 2014 at 10:04am: Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 10:50pm: ... wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 12:14pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 12:09pm: the lack of 'ongoing' evolution suggests all the different species were created as they basically are now. eg, horses started to 'evolve' 20 million years ago. What happened to the ones that 'started to evolve' 10 million and 5 million or 1 million years ago? How come there are no 1/2 created species ? Every breed of dog has evolved from wolves in just 30,000 years.  Give them 10 million years and who knows how some of them would look. So what happpened to the dogs that started to evolve from wolves 20,000 years ago, or 10,000 years ago, or 5000 years ago? Where are the 1/2 wolf 1/2 chichuaua animals ? It's like there are chichuauas, and trhere are wolves. And they are different. About 130,000 years ago man domesticated some of the more friendly and docile wolves which were around their village. Over time, due to natural selection (only dogs which suited the needs of man were kept to breed) these wolves eventually became the domestic dogs we have today. The divergence happened 130,000 years ago, and since that time wolves and domestic dogs have evolved independently of each other. That is why there is no 1/2 wolf 1/2 Chihuahua animal How could anyone possible know this? It is hard enough knowing for sure what exactly happened just a hundred years ago let alone over a hundred thousand. Really, once we get past about 5 thousand years we really have no idea what humanity was doing. Bits and pieces here and there, but certainly nothing to the point of knowing how the locals related to wolfs in their village.

Quite easily through archeology. They started finding the bones of dogs/wolves in the villages. Some of the owners even had their pet buried with them. 

New breeds can be created within mere decades.  It's not hard to see...if you want to.

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 4^th, 2014 at 10:32am:

Quantum wrote on Jan 4th, 2014 at 10:19am: The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 4th, 2014 at 10:04am: Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 10:50pm: ... wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 12:14pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on Jan 3rd, 2014 at 12:09pm: the lack of 'ongoing' evolution suggests all the different species were created as they basically are now. eg, horses started to 'evolve' 20 million years ago. What happened to the ones that 'started to evolve' 10 million and 5 million or 1 million years ago? How come there are no 1/2 created species ? Every breed of dog has evolved from wolves in just 30,000 years.  Give them 10 million years and who knows how some of them would look. So what happpened to the dogs that started to evolve from wolves 20,000 years ago, or 10,000 years ago, or 5000 years ago? Where are the 1/2 wolf 1/2 chichuaua animals ? It's like there are chichuauas, and trhere are wolves. And they are different. About 130,000 years ago man domesticated some of the more friendly and docile wolves which were around their village. Over time, due to natural selection (only dogs which suited the needs of man were kept to breed) these wolves eventually became the domestic dogs we have today. The divergence happened 130,000 years ago, and since that time wolves and domestic dogs have evolved independently of each other. That is why there is no 1/2 wolf 1/2 Chihuahua animal How could anyone possible know this? It is hard enough knowing for sure what exactly happened just a hundred years ago let alone over a hundred thousand. Really, once we get past about 5 thousand years we really have no idea what humanity was doing. Bits and pieces here and there, but certainly nothing to the point of knowing how the locals related to wolfs in their village.  Quite easily through archeology. They started finding the bones of dogs/wolves in the villages. Some of the owners even had their pet buried with them.

It is known that many animals (such as Horses) were domesticated about 6000 years ago. There is also evidence that other animals may have been domesticated as long as 10,000 years ago. There is some speculation that wolves may have have been even earlier. Possibly as far back as 20-30 thousand years ago, although there is nothing really solid to work from.

How do we jump from that to over 130,000 years, as well as knowing that it was because of the usefulness of the wolves to humans that dogs came to be? That seems like a huge amount of speculation with little to go from.

Quantum wrote on Jan 4^th, 2014 at 11:17am:

It is known that many animals (such as Horses) were domesticated about 6000 years ago. There is also evidence that other animals may have been domesticated as long as 10,000 years ago. There is some speculation that wolves may have have been even earlier. Possibly as far back as 20-30 thousand years ago, although there is nothing really solid to work from. How do we jump from that to over 130,000 years, as well as knowing that it was because of the usefulness of the wolves to humans that dogs came to be? That seems like a huge amount of speculation with little to go from.

Quote:

Evolution of the Dog       Recent molecular evidence shows that dogs are descended from the gray wolf, domesticated about 130,000 years ago. How and when this domestication happened has been a matter of speculation. It was thought until very recently that dogs were wild until about 12,000 years ago. But DNA analysis published in 1997 suggests a date of about 130,000 years ago for the transformation of wolves to dogs. This means that wolves began to adapt to human society long before humans settled down and began practicing agriculture. This earlier timing casts doubt on the long-held myth that humans domesticated dogs to serve as guards or companions to assist them. Rather, say some experts, dogs may have exploited a niche they discovered in early human society and got humans to take them in out of the cold. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/01/5/l_015_02.html

So yes there is still some debate about the exact timing and reasons for domestication but there is little doubt that for many thousands of years dogs have been used as companians, guards and workers and have been breed accordingly.

"It is known that many animals (such as Horses) were domesticated about 6000 years ago."

Isnt that when the earth was "created"?

Which is a prime example of why religion needs to be let to die out a natural death . . . .

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 4^th, 2014 at 12:05pm:

"It is known that many animals (such as Horses) were domesticated about 6000 years ago." Isnt that when the earth was "created"? Which is a prime example of why religion needs to be let to die out a natural death . . . . SOB

Nothing better than a safer world for our kids

... wrote on Jan 4^th, 2014 at 11:11am:

New breeds can be created within mere decades.  It's not hard to see...if you want to.

yes, they can be.
But in nature, where are the 1/2 zebras, 1/2 horses ?
Where are the creatures that are only a few 100/1000 years started on their evolution journey ?

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 4^th, 2014 at 11:57am:

Quantum wrote on Jan 4th, 2014 at 11:17am: It is known that many animals (such as Horses) were domesticated about 6000 years ago. There is also evidence that other animals may have been domesticated as long as 10,000 years ago. There is some speculation that wolves may have have been even earlier. Possibly as far back as 20-30 thousand years ago, although there is nothing really solid to work from. How do we jump from that to over 130,000 years, as well as knowing that it was because of the usefulness of the wolves to humans that dogs came to be? That seems like a huge amount of speculation with little to go from. Quote: Evolution of the Dog       Recent molecular evidence shows that dogs are descended from the gray wolf, domesticated about 130,000 years ago. How and when this domestication happened has been a matter of speculation. It was thought until very recently that dogs were wild until about 12,000 years ago. But DNA analysis published in 1997 suggests a date of about 130,000 years ago for the transformation of wolves to dogs. This means that wolves began to adapt to human society long before humans settled down and began practicing agriculture. This earlier timing casts doubt on the long-held myth that humans domesticated dogs to serve as guards or companions to assist them. Rather, say some experts, dogs may have exploited a niche they discovered in early human society and got humans to take them in out of the cold. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/01/5/l_015_02.html So yes there is still some debate about the exact timing and reasons for domestication but there is little doubt that for many thousands of years dogs have been used as companians, guards and workers and have been breed accordingly.

Thanks for the link. I will have to look into it more. 

... wrote on Jan 1^st, 2014 at 11:29am:

I doubt it too.  Christianity might be dying out, but the human emotion that fueled it sure isn't.  We can see the same fervour of old school religious faith applied to new ideologies.  Examples include atheists, climate change and equality nuts.

Yeah, have to hate those "equality nuts", like those creeps who promote peace, love, and understanding, LOSERS!!

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 4^th, 2014 at 12:05pm:

"It is known that many animals (such as Horses) were domesticated about 6000 years ago." Isnt that when the earth was "created"? Which is a prime example of why religion needs to be let to die out a natural death . . . . SOB

You really do assume too much. Your entire science vs Christianity mindset is a result of being an uneducated idiot who has being brainwashed by militant atheist with an agenda. More than that, for someone who keeps saying "that's in America, where in Australia" you do seem to let local US issues dominate Australian conversations.

Most Australian Christians are not anti science. In fact there are many professional scientist who are Christian. Just because you have turned science into your god, were you believe whatever you are told as you hope for the day we are living in Star Trek land, does not mean that others are anti science just because they like to stick to facts.

I for one have never said that the earth is only 6000 years old. You just keep buying the lie that all Christians are a bunch of inbreeds who won't use electricity because that's science stuff. 

Quantum wrote on Jan 4^th, 2014 at 1:44pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 4th, 2014 at 12:05pm: "It is known that many animals (such as Horses) were domesticated about 6000 years ago." Isnt that when the earth was "created"? Which is a prime example of why religion needs to be let to die out a natural death . . . . SOB You really do assume too much. Your entire science vs Christianity mindset is a result of being an uneducated idiot who has being brainwashed by militant atheist with an agenda. More than that, for someone who keeps saying "that's in America, where in Australia" you do seem to let local US issues dominate Australian conversations. Most Australian Christians are not anti science. In fact there are many professional scientist who are Christian. Just because you have turned science into your god, were you believe whatever you are told as you hope for the day we are living in Star Trek land, does not mean that others are anti science just because they like to stick to facts. I for one have never said that the earth is only 6000 years old. You just keep buying the lie that all Christians are a bunch of inbreeds who won't use electricity because that's science stuff.

Hahahaha! Again you read 3 words and guess the rest seeing what you want to see . . .

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 4^th, 2014 at 2:39pm:

Quantum wrote on Jan 4th, 2014 at 1:44pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 4th, 2014 at 12:05pm: "It is known that many animals (such as Horses) were domesticated about 6000 years ago." Isnt that when the earth was "created"? Which is a prime example of why religion needs to be let to die out a natural death . . . . SOB You really do assume too much. Your entire science vs Christianity mindset is a result of being an uneducated idiot who has being brainwashed by militant atheist with an agenda. More than that, for someone who keeps saying "that's in America, where in Australia" you do seem to let local US issues dominate Australian conversations. Most Australian Christians are not anti science. In fact there are many professional scientist who are Christian. Just because you have turned science into your god, were you believe whatever you are told as you hope for the day we are living in Star Trek land, does not mean that others are anti science just because they like to stick to facts. I for one have never said that the earth is only 6000 years old. You just keep buying the lie that all Christians are a bunch of inbreeds who won't use electricity because that's science stuff.  Hahahaha! Again you read 3 words and guess the rest seeing what you want to see . . . SOB

And what the hell did you just do?

Here we have an example of you accusing Christians of believing that the world in only 6000 years old. No one said that to be the case, but you assume because a couple of morons in the south of the US preach it then every Church teaches it as well. No one here was speaking of a 6000 year old earth, especially not myself. So what the hell were you talking about in your post?


Quote:

Isnt that when the earth was "created"? Which is a prime example of why religion needs to be let to die out a natural death . . . .

How can something that a small group of people hold to be a prime example of why all people should have their beliefs stopped? And yes it would have to be forced, because despite the people who have claimed Christianity is soon to die over the centuries, it is still going strong.

Yet again you have no idea what the hell others are talking about, but even worse, no idea what you yourself have just said.

Quantum wrote on Jan 4^th, 2014 at 2:50pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 4th, 2014 at 2:39pm: Quantum wrote on Jan 4th, 2014 at 1:44pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 4th, 2014 at 12:05pm: "It is known that many animals (such as Horses) were domesticated about 6000 years ago." Isnt that when the earth was "created"? Which is a prime example of why religion needs to be let to die out a natural death . . . . SOB You really do assume too much. Your entire science vs Christianity mindset is a result of being an uneducated idiot who has being brainwashed by militant atheist with an agenda. More than that, for someone who keeps saying "that's in America, where in Australia" you do seem to let local US issues dominate Australian conversations. Most Australian Christians are not anti science. In fact there are many professional scientist who are Christian. Just because you have turned science into your god, were you believe whatever you are told as you hope for the day we are living in Star Trek land, does not mean that others are anti science just because they like to stick to facts. I for one have never said that the earth is only 6000 years old. You just keep buying the lie that all Christians are a bunch of inbreeds who won't use electricity because that's science stuff.  Hahahaha! Again you read 3 words and guess the rest seeing what you want to see . . . SOB And what the hell did you just do? Here we have an example of you accusing Christians of believing that the world in only 6000 years old. No one said that to be the case, but you assume because a couple of morons in the south of the US preach it then every Church teaches it as well. No one here was speaking of a 6000 year old earth, especially not myself. So what the hell were you talking about in your post? Quote: Isnt that when the earth was "created"? Which is a prime example of why religion needs to be let to die out a natural death . . . . How can something that a small group of people hold to be a prime example of why all people should have their beliefs stopped? And yes it would have to be forced, because despite the people who have claimed Christianity is soon to die over the centuries, it is still going strong. Yet again you have no idea what the hell others are talking about, but even worse, no idea what you yourself have just said.

Do you even listen to yourself (or read what you said - or what the other person said?)

SOB

mozzaok wrote on Jan 4^th, 2014 at 1:37pm:

... wrote on Jan 1st, 2014 at 11:29am: I doubt it too.  Christianity might be dying out, but the human emotion that fueled it sure isn't.  We can see the same fervour of old school religious faith applied to new ideologies.  Examples include atheists, climate change and equality nuts.  Yeah, have to hate those "equality nuts", like those creeps who promote peace, love, and understanding, LOSERS!!

Hardout christians used to think only they were righteous, and everyone else was a dirty goddamn sinner needing to be rescued from the fast track to hell - by whatever means necessary.

Sound familiar?

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 4^th, 2014 at 2:55pm:

Quantum wrote on Jan 4th, 2014 at 2:50pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 4th, 2014 at 2:39pm: Quantum wrote on Jan 4th, 2014 at 1:44pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jan 4th, 2014 at 12:05pm: "It is known that many animals (such as Horses) were domesticated about 6000 years ago." Isnt that when the earth was "created"? Which is a prime example of why religion needs to be let to die out a natural death . . . . SOB You really do assume too much. Your entire science vs Christianity mindset is a result of being an uneducated idiot who has being brainwashed by militant atheist with an agenda. More than that, for someone who keeps saying "that's in America, where in Australia" you do seem to let local US issues dominate Australian conversations. Most Australian Christians are not anti science. In fact there are many professional scientist who are Christian. Just because you have turned science into your god, were you believe whatever you are told as you hope for the day we are living in Star Trek land, does not mean that others are anti science just because they like to stick to facts. I for one have never said that the earth is only 6000 years old. You just keep buying the lie that all Christians are a bunch of inbreeds who won't use electricity because that's science stuff.  Hahahaha! Again you read 3 words and guess the rest seeing what you want to see . . . SOB And what the hell did you just do? Here we have an example of you accusing Christians of believing that the world in only 6000 years old. No one said that to be the case, but you assume because a couple of morons in the south of the US preach it then every Church teaches it as well. No one here was speaking of a 6000 year old earth, especially not myself. So what the hell were you talking about in your post? Quote: Isnt that when the earth was "created"? Which is a prime example of why religion needs to be let to die out a natural death . . . . How can something that a small group of people hold to be a prime example of why all people should have their beliefs stopped? And yes it would have to be forced, because despite the people who have claimed Christianity is soon to die over the centuries, it is still going strong. Yet again you have no idea what the hell others are talking about, but even worse, no idea what you yourself have just said. Do you even listen to yourself (or read what you said - or what the other person said?) SOB

Are you a cat or a parrot? I swear all you do is take others complaints against yourself and just repeat them back.

You are a delusional fool. Time to get that plate in your head looked at. It is either coming lose or rusting badly.

Quantum wrote on Jan 4^th, 2014 at 1:44pm:

You really do assume too much. Your entire science vs Christianity mindset is a result of being an uneducated idiot who has being brainwashed by militant atheist with an agenda. More than that, for someone who keeps saying "that's in America, where in Australia" you do seem to let local US issues dominate Australian conversations. Most Australian Christians are not anti science. In fact there are many professional scientist who are Christian. Just because you have turned science into your god, were you believe whatever you are told as you hope for the day we are living in Star Trek land, does not mean that others are anti science just because they like to stick to facts. I for one have never said that the earth is only 6000 years old. You just keep buying the lie that all Christians are a bunch of inbreeds who won't use electricity because that's science stuff.

I'm intrigued to see Christianity defended as factual. An acknowledgement that the Earth is older than a few thousand years is certainly a step in the right direction. But a belief that  a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father and born by a virgin can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magic apple tree, still sounds like a hard truth for a member of the reality based community to swallow. It makes the idea of landscaping done by a giant rainbow serpent sound quite plausible in fact.

Now I'm a live and let live kind of guy, I see flag waving and Nationalism more than a bit silly, but it makes for a bit of fun in the sporting arena and I'm okay with that; though taken to extremes it gets a lot of people dead.

Religion is a lot like that, but whereas most people can support a team without starting a war over it, the religious have a nasty habit of belief on steroids. I mean you only have to look at the "Holy Land" to see that. And it's all just a power trip really isn't it. The crumby little bits of charity don't really add up to the income of tithes do they? They're always pretty loathe to dip into the pocket prefering the charity to result from volunteers cooking soup from donated food, or the redistributiohn of donated blankets. I never recall hearing of the church paying anybodies power bill.

Religion:- Give it a rest for gods sake.

Grey wrote on Jan 4^th, 2014 at 6:26pm:

Quantum wrote on Jan 4th, 2014 at 1:44pm: You really do assume too much. Your entire science vs Christianity mindset is a result of being an uneducated idiot who has being brainwashed by militant atheist with an agenda. More than that, for someone who keeps saying "that's in America, where in Australia" you do seem to let local US issues dominate Australian conversations. Most Australian Christians are not anti science. In fact there are many professional scientist who are Christian. Just because you have turned science into your god, were you believe whatever you are told as you hope for the day we are living in Star Trek land, does not mean that others are anti science just because they like to stick to facts. I for one have never said that the earth is only 6000 years old. You just keep buying the lie that all Christians are a bunch of inbreeds who won't use electricity because that's science stuff.  I'm intrigued to see Christianity defended as factual. An acknowledgement that the Earth is older than a few thousand years is certainly a step in the right direction. But a belief that  a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father and born by a virgin can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magic apple tree, still sounds like a hard truth for a member of the reality based community to swallow. It makes the idea of landscaping done by a giant rainbow serpent sound quite plausible in fact.

Well done!

You do have a way with words grey!

Oh I can't take the credit Yadda, it's a bit of an atheist trope, origin unknown. :-)   ;D

Heres a quote from the so-called pope of freemasonry Albert Pike;

"We shall unleash the Nihilists and Atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will be from that moment without compass (direction), anxious for an ideal, but with out knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view, a manifestation which will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time" (William Guy Carr, Pawns in the Game, p. xv-xvi).

The destruction of Christianity was planned along time ago.
But its not just Christianity they want to destroy, they want to get rid of all religions and have us all worshipping Gaia.

Quote:

An acknowledgement that the Earth is older than a few thousand years is certainly a step in the right direction. But a belief that  a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father and born by a virgin can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magic apple tree, still sounds like a hard truth for a member of the reality based community to swallow.

Its easier to believe than the whole universe was created by a big bang.

The source being smaller than a pinpoint which for some strange reason exploded and from this pin point the whole fricken universe materialised.

HHHHMMMMMnnnnnnnn something out of nothing.

Doesn't happen in the real world as far as I know.

Everything transforms from one state to another.

So how can a object that can sit on the end of a pin's point, the human eye could not see it, it's that small suddenly explode and presto we have a universe so big we cant see its outer edges.

That's a tall story if I've ever heard one.

Or that we all came from a worm like creature that decided to crawl out of the sea one day cause it thought land was a better prospect.

Just go and look outside not man's world but nature, the birds the trees the grass etc. the earth the atmosphere the solar system the galaxy the universe.

Luck, somehow luck just doesn't cut it either for me anyway.

Is there a God, for me there has to be something greater than our limited intelligence can comprehend and or appreciate.

Was the son of man God's son, that's for every soul to figure out for themselves, the bible does say that God gave us free choice.

Maybe God created the big bang which is something out of nothing, cause physics tells us different.

The bible does say first there was light and then he created the heavens.

What was this light.................???????

BTW who knows how God measures his days, maybe one year for us is a second to God......??????

The God theory for me is the only one that makes sense.

Now where is he......??????....where is heaven and hell.....????

I don't smacking having a clue.......!!!!!!

One of the points that leans me over to the son of man, is that he was a Jew and yet the Jews had him killed through the power of Rome.

And what about the words the son of man spoke.

Could such words really come from an Earthman.....??????

What about his deeds/works....??????

Some relaxing music for all you unbelievers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrmJE--gE0I

This one blew me away, soothing to the soul....!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zbwgtye-dSA


Quote:

LORD, I HAVE CRIED TO YOU LORD, I Have Cried Out Unto You: hear me! Hear me, O Lord! Lord, I Have Cried Out Unto You: hear me! Receive the voice of my prayer! When I call upon You, hear me, O Lord! Let my prayer arise in Your sight as incense, And let the lifting up of my hands be an evening sacrifice. Hear me, O Lord!

I think that the meaning is still understandable, but as our language changes, the meaning gets lost in translation.
Maybe an updated bible in modern language would help somewhat. And also being mindful that people aren't so sucked in by promises of mumbo jumbo as they once were.

The important (to me) messages of Christianity are as valid today as they were 2000yrs ago, however, there needs to be a recognition that when people smell bs these days, the baby often goes out with the bathwater.

I agree. Lettuce Spray.

---

Grey wrote on Jan 4^th, 2014 at 6:26pm:

Quantum wrote on Jan 4th, 2014 at 1:44pm: You really do assume too much. Your entire science vs Christianity mindset is a result of being an uneducated idiot who has being brainwashed by militant atheist with an agenda. More than that, for someone who keeps saying "that's in America, where in Australia" you do seem to let local US issues dominate Australian conversations. Most Australian Christians are not anti science. In fact there are many professional scientist who are Christian. Just because you have turned science into your god, were you believe whatever you are told as you hope for the day we are living in Star Trek land, does not mean that others are anti science just because they like to stick to facts. I for one have never said that the earth is only 6000 years old. You just keep buying the lie that all Christians are a bunch of inbreeds who won't use electricity because that's science stuff.  I'm intrigued to see Christianity defended as factual. An acknowledgement that the Earth is older than a few thousand years is certainly a step in the right direction. But a belief that  a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father and born by a virgin can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magic apple tree, still sounds like a hard truth for a member of the reality based community to swallow. It makes the idea of landscaping done by a giant rainbow serpent sound quite plausible in fact.

"It is my suspicion that the universe is not only stranger than we do imagine but it is stranger than we can imagine."
J.B.S.Haldane - biochemist



Grey,

People like you think that people like me are strange [i.e. irrational].

I believe that human beings, all of us, are beings, entity's, who are trying to grasp onto create some semblance of certainty for ourselves.

When clearly [i believe] there is no way of us grasping onto any form 'certainty', in this 'universe'.

Yes, we all believe that the sun will rise tomorrow morning, but is there any 100% certainty that it must ?

We all experience the same journey.

Some of us have chosen to take 'out of the way paths' [a 'less travelled' path?].

Are people like myself 'delusional', because we take a 'less travelled' path?

I believe the spirit of Christianity is on the rise.

I believe the spirit of Christianity is on the wane.


Do you think lotsa mankind, love God, love God's righteousness ?

Is that why the state of the world [today] is in the state that it is ?




Matthew 24:37
But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.


Genesis 6:5
And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
.....
11  The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence.

Yadda wrote on Mar 5^th, 2014 at 10:44pm:

I believe the spirit of Christianity is on the wane. Do you think lotsa mankind, love God, love God's righteousness ? Is that why the state of the world [today] is in the state that it is ?

What state is that? - a state of less Christianity?

- certainly not increased warfare. We are probably living in the most peaceful period in history.  Compared to the last decade, the past was almost medieval by comparison. ;D.


Quote:

But Joshua Goldstein argues that despite Iraq and Afghanistan, Congo and Sudan, the past 10 years have seen fewer war deaths than any decade in the past 100 years. And Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker goes even further. We may be living in the most peaceful period in the history of our species. Really? And if so, why?

http://www.winningthewaronwar.com/

muso wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 8:55am:

Yadda wrote on Mar 5th, 2014 at 10:44pm: I believe the spirit of Christianity is on the wane. Do you think lotsa mankind, love God, love God's righteousness ? Is that why the state of the world [today] is in the state that it is ? What state is that? - a state of less Christianity? - certainly not increased warfare. We are probably living in the most peaceful period in history.  Compared to the last decade, the past was almost medieval by comparison. ;D. Quote: But Joshua Goldstein argues that despite Iraq and Afghanistan, Congo and Sudan, the past 10 years have seen fewer war deaths than any decade in the past 100 years. And Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker goes even further. We may be living in the most peaceful period in the history of our species. Really? And if so, why? http://www.winningthewaronwar.com/

I often think about those who lived through the first half of the 20th Century. In the 31 years between 1914 and 1945 there was 2 world wars and a great depression. All that in just 31 years.

muso wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 8:55am:

Yadda wrote on Mar 5th, 2014 at 10:44pm: I believe the spirit of Christianity is on the wane. Do you think lotsa mankind, love God, love God's righteousness ? Is that why the state of the world [today] is in the state that it is ? What state is that? - a state of less Christianity? - certainly not increased warfare. We are probably living in the most peaceful period in history.  Compared to the last decade, the past was almost medieval by comparison. ;D. Quote: But Joshua Goldstein argues that despite Iraq and Afghanistan, Congo and Sudan, the past 10 years have seen fewer war deaths than any decade in the past 100 years. And Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker goes even further. We may be living in the most peaceful period in the history of our species. Really? And if so, why? http://www.winningthewaronwar.com/

The longer the peace, the more devastating the war that follows.

In stock market terms, I believe they call it a "correction", and as we know, it cannot grow forever.

muso wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 8:55am:

Yadda wrote on Mar 5th, 2014 at 10:44pm: I believe the spirit of Christianity is on the wane. Do you think lotsa mankind, love God, love God's righteousness ? Is that why the state of the world [today] is in the state that it is ? What state is that? - a state of less Christianity? - certainly not increased warfare. We are probably living in the most peaceful period in history.  Compared to the last decade, the past was almost medieval by comparison. ;D. Quote: But Joshua Goldstein argues that despite Iraq and Afghanistan, Congo and Sudan, the past 10 years have seen fewer war deaths than any decade in the past 100 years. And Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker goes even further. We may be living in the most peaceful period in the history of our species. Really? And if so, why? http://www.winningthewaronwar.com/

Quote:

Winning the War on War: The Decline of Armed Conflict Worldwide Despite the gory headlines, the decade since 9/11 has been the most peaceful worldwide in the past century. .....Taking us from his own sleepless night in Beirut as shells landed in nearby streets, to the agonizing failures of the international community in Bosnia and Rwanda, to the recent triumphs of peacekeeping in West Africa, Goldstein tells the most exciting and important untold global story of our age. He shows how large-scale looting, sexual assault, and atrocities are being stopped, and how we can continue building on these hopeful and inspiring achievements to keep winning the war on war.

http://www.winningthewaronwar.com/





1965-1966
Google;
indonesia, massacre of hundreds of thousands of civilians, anti-communist

1971
Google;
millions dead east pakistan

1980-2000
Google;
muslims kill, 2 million christians sudan

The victims of the intractable conflict in the southern Philippines, that has been going on for decades.

The 1980's Iraq-Iran war where hundreds of thousands of combatants died ?

Iraq, today.

Syria, today.

Sudan, today.

Somalia, today.



Yes, we have lived in an age of peace for decades.            :P

"...the most peaceful period in history."






Matthew 24:37
But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38  For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,


Genesis 6:5
And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
.....
11  The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence.


Ezekiel 7:23
Make a chain: for the land is full of bloody crimes, and the city is full of violence.
24  Wherefore I will bring the worst of the heathen, and they shall possess their houses: I will also make the pomp of the strong to cease; and their holy places shall be defiled.
25  Destruction cometh; and they shall seek peace, and there shall be none.
26  Mischief shall come upon mischief, and rumour shall be upon rumour; then shall they seek a vision of the prophet; but the law shall perish from the priest, and counsel from the ancients.
27  The king shall mourn, and the prince shall be clothed with desolation, and the hands of the people of the land shall be troubled: I will do unto them after their way, and according to their deserts will I judge them; and they shall know that I am the LORD.


Psalms 28:3
Draw me not away with the wicked, and with the workers of iniquity, which speak peace to their neighbours, but mischief is in their hearts.
4  Give them according to their deeds, and according to the wickedness of their endeavours: give them after the work of their hands; render to them their desert.

Yadda wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 12:34pm:

Yes, we have lived in an age of peace for decades.            :P "...the most peaceful period in history."

The last decade 2003-2013 has actually been the most peaceful period in living history.  It doesn't say that we have lived in peace for decades.

muso wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 2:22pm:

Yadda wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 12:34pm: Yes, we have lived in an age of peace for decades.            :P "...the most peaceful period in history." The last decade 2003-2013 has actually been the most peaceful period in living history.  It doesn't say that we have lived in peace for decades.

You wouldn't agree if you lived in Iraq,  Afghanistan or Syria.

muso wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 2:22pm:

Yadda wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 12:34pm: Yes, we have lived in an age of peace for decades.            :P "...the most peaceful period in history." The last decade 2003-2013 has actually been the most peaceful period in living history.  It doesn't say that we have lived in peace for decades.

Which world do you live in.....????

No wonder your part of the anthropogenic global warming religion.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 2:34pm:

muso wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 2:22pm: Yadda wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 12:34pm: Yes, we have lived in an age of peace for decades.            :P "...the most peaceful period in history." The last decade 2003-2013 has actually been the most peaceful period in living history.  It doesn't say that we have lived in peace for decades. You wouldn't agree if you lived in Iraq,  Afghanistan or Syria.

Read the book.  How many people have died in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria in the last 10 years?

Iraq - About 0.5 Million
Afghanistan  - About 20,000
Syria - About 100,000

It just doesn't compare.


First World War 15 million dead
Russian Revolution 9 million
Early Soviet Union under Stalin - 20 million
The Congo 10 million

Chinese civil Wars 7 million
Mao Zedong  - 40 million
Nigerian Civil War 2.8 million
Rwanda 0.8 million
Second World War - 66 million
Spanish Civil War - 0.5 Million
Vietnam War - 3.8 million
Korean War 1.2 million
Soviet Afghanistan War 79-89 -  1.5 million

Then there was the 19th Century - about 2 million for Europe alone, then there was the Taiping revolution, the Opium War, the Mexican Civil War, US Civil War etc
27 million from the British in India. On a per capita basis, a lot more people died from war in the 19th century compared to the 20th.

0.6 million out of 7 billion total world population might seem a lot, but we're a lot more peaceful than we have been..... so far.  The First World War alone lost 15 million out of about 1 billion (world population at the time) and that was just 4 years.

muso wrote on Mar 8^th, 2014 at 7:46pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 2:34pm: muso wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 2:22pm: Yadda wrote on Mar 8th, 2014 at 12:34pm: Yes, we have lived in an age of peace for decades.            :P "...the most peaceful period in history." The last decade 2003-2013 has actually been the most peaceful period in living history.  It doesn't say that we have lived in peace for decades. You wouldn't agree if you lived in Iraq,  Afghanistan or Syria. Read the book.  How many people have died in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria in the last 10 years? Iraq - About 0.5 Million Afghanistan  - About 20,000 Syria - About 100,000 It just doesn't compare. First World War 15 million dead Russian Revolution 9 million Early Soviet Union under Stalin - 20 million The Congo 10 million Chinese civil Wars 7 million Mao Zedong  - 40 million Nigerian Civil War 2.8 million Rwanda 0.8 million Second World War - 66 million Spanish Civil War - 0.5 Million Vietnam War - 3.8 million Korean War 1.2 million Soviet Afghanistan War 79-89 -  1.5 million Then there was the 19th Century - about 2 million for Europe alone, then there was the Taiping revolution, the Opium War, the Mexican Civil War, US Civil War etc 27 million from the British in India. On a per capita basis, a lot more people died from war in the 19th century compared to the 20th. 0.6 million out of 7 billion total world population might seem a lot, but we're a lot more peaceful than we have been..... so far.  The First World War alone lost 15 million out of about 1 billion (world population at the time) and that was just 4 years.

Still - those numbers don't mean much to someone in the middle of a war zone now.

muso,

Maybe i am mistaken, but i believe that widespread peace among men, can only exist when the majority of men perceive believe that they are not being treated unjustly [by their fellow men, or, by authorities and governments set over them to regulate their lives] ?

I believe that peace is the 'child' of justice.

[...and i believe that justice in a society of men is impossible, when there is no respect for truth in that society of men]






Quote:

The last decade 2003-2013 has actually been the most peaceful period in living history.

muso,

Is your argument that today, we live in a world where the principles of truth and justice are respected by men ?

Is your argument that today, we live in a world where the principles of truth and justice are defended by men ?


Dictionary;
principle = = a fundamental truth or proposition serving as the foundation for belief or action.      a rule or belief governing one’s personal behaviour.         morally correct behaviour and attitudes:




muso,

Turn on your TV, and watch the TV news tonight.

And see if mankind seem to be happy and content with the 'peace' [among men] that you describe - and are confident of.

Yadda wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 1:22am:

muso, Turn on your TV, and watch the TV news tonight. And see if mankind seem to be happy and content with the 'peace' [among men] that you describe - and are confident of.

I don't believe that happy and content (existentially) has as much to do with it as it being much harder to embroil the world in mega wars.

Dictatorships and convoluted defense treaties that automatically bring nations into a colossal battlefields appear to fading into history (hopefully).

Even the latest attempt (the attempted world Islamist jihad) is largely contained, with their only strategy being 'asymmetric' war, which depends on its enemies' over-reaction. This they almost achieved with 9/11.

But is it even imaginable that a British Prime Minister would have been publicly vilified and subjected to public scrutiny (in the way Tony Blair was for his military adventurism in the 19th/early 20th century)? Its true, though, that the US is more apprehensive about vilifying / indicting their head of state for military overreach / adventurism (with Australia following that model and 'pardoning' its head of government over our over-reaction).

Also, the 19th/early 20th century wars were predicated on (now bankrupt) idealism. Would we join a mega-war so readily for idealism in the 21st century?

It's hard to believe that intelligent people at the head of the church still believe in:

angels, devils, satans, witches, goblins, leprechauns, elfs
ghosts,  heaven & hell.

All this is the product of medieval superstition yet
there are still many people who believe it today.

JL,
I hope one day you join us & the world will live as one.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 10:18am:

It's hard to believe that intelligent people at the head of the church still believe in: angels, devils, satans, witches, goblins, leprechauns, elfs ghosts,  heaven & hell

Are you so sure of that. The Catholic Church has been playing that down for decades. Most (if not all ) western Anglican clerics (senior and junior) are avowed agnostics.

Yadda wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 1:22am:

muso, Is your argument that today, we live in a world where the principles of truth and justice are respected by men ? Is your argument that today, we live in a world where the principles of truth and justice are defended by men ?

No. "My" argument is simply that in proportion to the total world population we are killing fewer people through warfare.

NorthofNorth probably has posted a good reason for this.

If you look back 2000 years ago to the time of the Romans, the two Punic wars alone, obliterated 1.3 million people. People were expected to be part of the Roman army. 

Then in China about the same time, the population of China dropped from 68 million to 15.1 million in less than 30 years.

War is no longer the trade of the vast majority of people.

The vast majority of people in the world can ply an existence without being conscripted into the army and hacked to pieces on the battle field.

We are living in more peaceful times. It's borne out by facts and figures.

When we get back to truth and justice, the vast majority of people today probably do espouse those values, but that's not the basis of the argument. 

But are we happier? Again, probably.

Quote:

[clop clop clop] Who's that, then? CART MASTER: I dunno. Must be a king. CUSTOMER: Why? CART MASTER: He hasn't got sh1t all over him.

Does anyone really believe that Obama and Abbott believe in a God? They torture and kill people.


Actor Chris O'Dowd says religion is 'unacceptable'

Actor Chris O'Dowd thinks following a religion will eventually become as offensive and unacceptable as racism.

Now he says religious doctrine is halting human progress and brands it "a weird cult".
He also thinks US president Barack Obama had to overstate his Christian faith in order to get to the White House.
Advertisement 
O'Dowd has told Britain's GQ magazine: "For most of my life, I've been, 'Hey, I'm not into it, but I respect your right to believe whatever you want'. But as time goes on, weirdly, I'm growing less liberal. I'm more like, 'No, religion is ruining the world, you need to stop!'.
"There's going to be a turning point where it's going to be like racism. You know, 'You're not allowed to say that weird s**t! It's mad! And you're making everybody crazy!'
"And you know, now America can't have a president that doesn't say he believes in God. So we're f**ked! Like, they f**ked everything!
"You wanna go and live in your weird cult and talk about a man who lives in a cloud, you do that, but don't. I mean, you really think that Barack Obama believes in God? No way!"


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/celebrity/actor-chris-odowd-says-religion-is-unacceptable-20140308-34ded.html#ixzz2vUHTDXoA

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 10:24am:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:18am: It's hard to believe that intelligent people at the head of the church still believe in: angels, devils, satans, witches, goblins, leprechauns, elfs ghosts,  heaven & hell Are you so sure of that. The Catholic Church has been playing that down for decades. Most (if not all ) western Anglican clerics (senior and junior) are avowed agnostics.

Rubbish - the Pope &  his followers believe all that nonsense & a whole lot more.

e.g. turning cracker biscuits into the body of Christ & wine into his blood -
the list goes on & on.

It's all insane & it's time for the world to wake up.


P.S. - I forgot to mention miracles.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 10:31am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:24am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:18am: It's hard to believe that intelligent people at the head of the church still believe in: angels, devils, satans, witches, goblins, leprechauns, elfs ghosts,  heaven & hell Are you so sure of that. The Catholic Church has been playing that down for decades. Most (if not all ) western Anglican clerics (senior and junior) are avowed agnostics. Rubbish - the Pope &  his followers believe all that nonsense & a whole lot more. e.g. turning cracker biscuits into the body of Christ & wine into his blood - the list goes on & on. It's all insane & it's time for the world to wake up. P.S. - I forgot to mention miracles.

You're confusing solemn ritual with frank blind belief.

The Vatican particularly is highly sceptical (if not harbouring outright disbelief) in divine miracles. The devil is  never mentioned (except perhaps metaphorically). Sainthood in the Catholic Church is more akin to awarding a posthumous Victoria Cross for services rendered to humanity.

Its really only the weird and creepy American evangelical neo-Christianity that maintains a 14th century belief in these things.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 10:27am:

Does anyone really believe that Obama believe in a God?

Extremely unlikely. What he says as an American head of state regarding god is what he must say, not, I'd bet, what be truly believes.

muso wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 10:26am:

But are we happier? Again, probably.

This, apparently, was Lenin's great disappointment at the turn of the 20th century... The working class did not rise up against their aristocratic / bourgeois overlords (as Marx had predicted)...  Such that Lenin determined that if the eruption of revolution won't come from the soul of the working class, then he will bring it to them by force.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 10:48am:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:31am: NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:24am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:18am: It's hard to believe that intelligent people at the head of the church still believe in: angels, devils, satans, witches, goblins, leprechauns, elfs ghosts,  heaven & hell Are you so sure of that. The Catholic Church has been playing that down for decades. Most (if not all ) western Anglican clerics (senior and junior) are avowed agnostics. Rubbish - the Pope &  his followers believe all that nonsense & a whole lot more. e.g. turning cracker biscuits into the body of Christ & wine into his blood - the list goes on & on. It's all insane & it's time for the world to wake up. P.S. - I forgot to mention miracles. You're confusing solemn ritual with frank blind belief. The Vatican particularly is highly sceptical (if not harbouring outright disbelief) in divine miracles. The devil is  never mentioned (except perhaps metaphorically). Sainthood in the Catholic Church is more akin to awarding a posthumous Victoria Cross for services rendered to humanity. Its really only the weird and creepy American evangelical neo-Christianity that maintains a 14th century belief in these things.

Sorry for the truth -

the Pope &  his followers believe all that nonsense & a whole lot more.

greggerypeccary wrote on Dec 31^st, 2013 at 4:00pm:

I've seen them stop their cars in Sydney traffic, and get out and start praying on the road. Praying they don't get hit by a bus, I assume.

No.

Praying that as taxi drivers they'll get a drunk young Aussie female to take home at 2 in the morning ...

Their prayers are often answered.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 11:13am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:48am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:31am: NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:24am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:18am: It's hard to believe that intelligent people at the head of the church still believe in: angels, devils, satans, witches, goblins, leprechauns, elfs ghosts,  heaven & hell Are you so sure of that. The Catholic Church has been playing that down for decades. Most (if not all ) western Anglican clerics (senior and junior) are avowed agnostics. Rubbish - the Pope &  his followers believe all that nonsense & a whole lot more. e.g. turning cracker biscuits into the body of Christ & wine into his blood - the list goes on & on. It's all insane & it's time for the world to wake up. P.S. - I forgot to mention miracles. You're confusing solemn ritual with frank blind belief. The Vatican particularly is highly sceptical (if not harbouring outright disbelief) in divine miracles. The devil is  never mentioned (except perhaps metaphorically). Sainthood in the Catholic Church is more akin to awarding a posthumous Victoria Cross for services rendered to humanity. Its really only the weird and creepy American evangelical neo-Christianity that maintains a 14th century belief in these things. Sorry for the truth - the Pope &  his followers believe all that nonsense & a whole lot more.

There's no doubt that many Christians do believe that the devil frankly exists (i.e. is not just a metaphor for psychiatric conditions and predilections).

There's no doubt that nearly everybody (if not everybody) harbours a vestige of superstition... Touching wood, wearing lucky charms, chanting mantras, 'sending it out to the universe' et al... This phenomenon, I believe, will be part of the human condition forever...

Like the old Virgil quote - "They can because they think they can"... The challenge for orthodox religions and the new ones (New Age etc) is: How to make them think they can.

The most convenient and most readily accepted doctrine for those who seek answers to intractable personality disorders or 'bad luck' is that of externalising fault.

Where clerics deploy the concept of 'the enemy' as the cause of the sufferers' 'evil deeds' it is done (without cynicism) in the hopes of assisting the suffering and 'repentant' sinner to transcend his own personality by extricating him from guilt. This, in itself, is not an evil, nor does it necessarily require the confessor to actually believe in devils and demons.

But, yes, there is the risk that those 'healed' by such tactics (or believers in the frank existence of the devil) can find their personality issues manifest in other ways (like taking it on themselves to 'fight the devil' by causing harm to those they have determined are the 'devil incarnate' - as seen within American evangelism).

They can because they think they can... How, in the secular world, can we manifest Virgil's observation? How do we learn to believe we can without externalisation?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 10:48am:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:31am: NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:24am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:18am: It's hard to believe that intelligent people at the head of the church still believe in: angels, devils, satans, witches, goblins, leprechauns, elfs ghosts,  heaven & hell Are you so sure of that. The Catholic Church has been playing that down for decades. Most (if not all ) western Anglican clerics (senior and junior) are avowed agnostics. Rubbish - the Pope &  his followers believe all that nonsense & a whole lot more. e.g. turning cracker biscuits into the body of Christ & wine into his blood - the list goes on & on. It's all insane & it's time for the world to wake up. P.S. - I forgot to mention miracles. You're confusing solemn ritual with frank blind belief. The Vatican particularly is highly sceptical (if not harbouring outright disbelief) in divine miracles. The devil is  never mentioned (except perhaps metaphorically). Sainthood in the Catholic Church is more akin to awarding a posthumous Victoria Cross for services rendered to humanity. Its really only the weird and creepy American evangelical neo-Christianity that maintains a 14th century belief in these things.

LOL

The praise of men [and of the catholic church], is worthy indeed!

:)

That is what we are here for, to learn how to impress [and be envied by] our fellow men and women.

Who has the biggest house and the most desirable wife, on your street!        ;D

Yadda wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 12:19pm:

LOL The praise of men [and of the catholic church], is worthy indeed! :) That is what we are here for, to learn how to impress [and be envied by] our fellow men and women. Who has the biggest house and the most desirable wife, on your street!        ;D

We are, after all, akin to primates in that we can harbour envy for the wellbeing and good fortune of others.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 12:08pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 11:13am: NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:48am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:31am: NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:24am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:18am: It's hard to believe that intelligent people at the head of the church still believe in: angels, devils, satans, witches, goblins, leprechauns, elfs ghosts,  heaven & hell Are you so sure of that. The Catholic Church has been playing that down for decades. Most (if not all ) western Anglican clerics (senior and junior) are avowed agnostics. Rubbish - the Pope &  his followers believe all that nonsense & a whole lot more. e.g. turning cracker biscuits into the body of Christ & wine into his blood - the list goes on & on. It's all insane & it's time for the world to wake up. P.S. - I forgot to mention miracles. You're confusing solemn ritual with frank blind belief. The Vatican particularly is highly sceptical (if not harbouring outright disbelief) in divine miracles. The devil is  never mentioned (except perhaps metaphorically). Sainthood in the Catholic Church is more akin to awarding a posthumous Victoria Cross for services rendered to humanity. Its really only the weird and creepy American evangelical neo-Christianity that maintains a 14th century belief in these things. Sorry for the truth - the Pope &  his followers believe all that nonsense & a whole lot more. There's no doubt that many Christians do believe that the devil frankly exists (i.e. is not just a metaphor for psychiatric conditions and predilections). There's no doubt that nearly everybody (if not everybody) harbours a vestige of superstition... Touching wood, wearing lucky charms, chanting mantras, 'sending it out to the universe' et al... This phenomenon, I believe, will be part of the human condition forever... Like the old Virgil quote - "They can because they think they can"... The challenge for orthodox religions and the new ones (New Age etc) is: How to make them think they can. The most convenient and most readily accepted doctrine for those who seek answers to intractable personality disorders or 'bad luck' is that of externalising fault. Where clerics deploy the concept of 'the enemy' as the cause of the sufferers' 'evil deeds' it is done (without cynicism) in the hopes of assisting the suffering and 'repentant' sinner to transcend his own personality by extricating him from guilt. This, in itself, is not an evil, nor does it necessarily require the confessor to actually believe in devils and demons. But, yes, there is the risk that those 'healed' by such tactics (or believers in the frank existence of the devil) can find their personality issues manifest in other ways (like taking it on themselves to 'fight the devil' by causing harm to those they have determined are the 'devil incarnate' - as seen within American evangelism). They can because they think they can... How, in the secular world, can we manifest Virgil's observation? How do we learn to believe we can without externalisation?

Religion is similar to a computer virus:

It's passed down to following generations by brain washing children.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 12:08pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 11:13am: NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:48am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:31am: NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:24am: Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 10:18am: It's hard to believe that intelligent people at the head of the church still believe in: angels, devils, satans, witches, goblins, leprechauns, elfs ghosts,  heaven & hell Are you so sure of that. The Catholic Church has been playing that down for decades. Most (if not all ) western Anglican clerics (senior and junior) are avowed agnostics. Rubbish - the Pope &  his followers believe all that nonsense & a whole lot more. e.g. turning cracker biscuits into the body of Christ & wine into his blood - the list goes on & on. It's all insane & it's time for the world to wake up. P.S. - I forgot to mention miracles. You're confusing solemn ritual with frank blind belief. The Vatican particularly is highly sceptical (if not harbouring outright disbelief) in divine miracles. The devil is  never mentioned (except perhaps metaphorically). Sainthood in the Catholic Church is more akin to awarding a posthumous Victoria Cross for services rendered to humanity. Its really only the weird and creepy American evangelical neo-Christianity that maintains a 14th century belief in these things. Sorry for the truth - the Pope &  his followers believe all that nonsense & a whole lot more. There's no doubt that many Christians do believe that the devil frankly exists (i.e. is not just a metaphor for psychiatric conditions and predilections). There's no doubt that nearly everybody (if not everybody) harbours a vestige of superstition... Touching wood, wearing lucky charms, chanting mantras, 'sending it out to the universe' et al... This phenomenon, I believe, will be part of the human condition forever... Like the old Virgil quote - "They can because they think they can"...

Like how in the early 20th cent. many circumstances [of history] conspired to bring about the formation of the state of Israel ?

And how, despite many challenges throughout their history, today the Jewish people - defying all odds - have managed to create a great and productive nation for themselves - despite many attempts by their neighbours to undermine their achievements and security ?


"They can because they think they can"...

The Jewish people were able to create and to secure their Jewish state - purely because the Jewish people knew that they could accomplish that reality ?

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 12:31pm:

Religion is similar to a computer virus: It's passed down to following generations by brain washing children.

Superstition is the natural effect of fear of the unknown. It can manifest as religion, but, just as easily, it can manifest in vilification of the societal 'enemy within' - an imagined fifth column.

If you're prepared to be cynical about religious belief, you should equally be as cynical about the 'religion' of nationalism, 'patriotism' and the religion of 'cultural destiny' in the form of a cultural 'born to rule'.

Yadda - you're another one who believes in religious nonsense.

How many of these do you believe in?

angels,
devils,
Satan,
witches,
goblins,
leprechauns,
elfs
miracles.
ghosts,
heaven
hell
holy cracker biscuits that are Christ's body
holy wine that is his blood
resurrections



You are forgiven

namaste

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 12:35pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 12:31pm: Religion is similar to a computer virus: It's passed down to following generations by brain washing children. Superstition is the natural effect of fear of the unknown. It can manifest as religion, but, just as easily, it can manifest in vilification of the societal 'enemy within' - an imagined fifth column. If you're prepared to be cynical about religious belief, you should equally be as cynical about the 'religion' of nationalism, 'patriotism' and the religion of 'cultural destiny' in the form of a cultural 'born to rule'.

I am not in any disagreement, with what you have expressed, in that sentiment.

To me, a persons religious belief [his/her 'religion'] is how he/she lives his/her life [....being guided by what he/she believes].

What we do believe [about our 'reality'?], does guide out actions and our choices in life [........i believe].

Yadda wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 12:31pm:

Like how in the early 20th cent. many circumstances [of history] conspired to bring about the formation of the state of Israel ? And how, despite many challenges throughout their history, today the Jewish people - defying all odds - have managed to create a great and productive nation for themselves - despite many attempts by their neighbours to undermine their achievements and security ? "They can because they think they can"... The Jewish people were able to create and to secure their Jewish state - purely because the Jewish people knew that they could accomplish that reality ?

The history of Jews is an interesting example.

As far as the stories of the old testament are concerned, almost unanimously now, Jewish intelligentsia, accept that they have no basis in history... They are myths... In other words, the Jewish right to the land is based on fantasy.

As far as defending their right to exist in Israel is concerned, the argument is now not so much that the land was chosen for them (with the exception of the Ultra-Orthodox, who largely don't believe in the existence of Israel - believing only the coming of the Messiah in the flesh has the right to establish the state), but, having been vilified for thousands of years as the perennial fifth column in Europe, have little reason to trust Europeans with their lives within Europe. Nearly every nation in Europe has vilified, expelled or murdered them en masse. Even the 'great' religious reformer, Martin Luther, despised them and recommended their vilification and exile from Christendom.

Their insistence on their right to exist in Israel is almost entirely due to fear of being murdered than the mythical 'god of the Jews'.

Yadda wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 12:44pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 12:35pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 12:31pm: Religion is similar to a computer virus: It's passed down to following generations by brain washing children. Superstition is the natural effect of fear of the unknown. It can manifest as religion, but, just as easily, it can manifest in vilification of the societal 'enemy within' - an imagined fifth column. If you're prepared to be cynical about religious belief, you should equally be as cynical about the 'religion' of nationalism, 'patriotism' and the religion of 'cultural destiny' in the form of a cultural 'born to rule'. I am not in any disagreement, with what you have expressed, in that sentiment. To me, a persons religious belief [his/her 'religion'] is how he/she lives his/her life [....being guided by what he/she believes]. What we do believe [about our 'reality'?], does guide out actions and our choices in life [........i believe].

That's true. Secularism is largely bolstered by our innate sense of wonder (manifesting as a fascination with science). It does not necessarily assuage existential fears as much as distracts us from them.

This should not be seen as a denial, but paraphrasing of Virgil... "We can because we think we can know the universe". To quote Einstein's ironic observation - "The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible."

How many of these do you believe in?

angels, - YES!
devils, - YES! demons
Satan, - YES!
witches, ????? - i could be classed as a witch - but i don't call spirits, i worship God, and i seek him
goblins - more demons
leprechauns - more demon entities
elfs - more demons
miracles. - what is a miracle, except something an 'occurrence' we cannot explain - you want to witness a 'miracle' ? birth of a new child - watch the sun rise - embrace someone who you deeply love
ghosts, - YES!      [there was a ghost, an entity, in this [my] house, when i first came here]
heaven - YES!
hell - ??? - i believe that there will be an uncomfortable place of confinement for those who do not please God
holy cracker biscuits that are Christ's body - it is a psychic aid, for those who need its 'power'
holy wine that is his blood - it is a psychic aid, for those who need its 'power'
resurrections - YES!



You are forgiven

namaste

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 12:55pm:

Yadda wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 12:44pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 12:35pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 12:31pm: Religion is similar to a computer virus: It's passed down to following generations by brain washing children. Superstition is the natural effect of fear of the unknown. It can manifest as religion, but, just as easily, it can manifest in vilification of the societal 'enemy within' - an imagined fifth column. If you're prepared to be cynical about religious belief, you should equally be as cynical about the 'religion' of nationalism, 'patriotism' and the religion of 'cultural destiny' in the form of a cultural 'born to rule'. I am not in any disagreement, with what you have expressed, in that sentiment. To me, a persons religious belief [his/her 'religion'] is how he/she lives his/her life [....being guided by what he/she believes]. What we do believe [about our 'reality'?], does guide out actions and our choices in life [........i believe]. That's true. Secularism is largely bolstered by our innate sense of wonder (manifesting as a fascination with science). It does not necessarily assuage existential fears as much as distracts us from them. This should not be seen as a denial, but paraphrasing of Virgil... "We can because we think we can know the universe". To quote Einstein's ironic observation - "The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible."

I like.....

"It is my suspicion that the universe is not only stranger than we do imagine but it is stranger than we can imagine."
J.B.S.Haldane - biochemist


We are very 'clever monkeys', but not that clever [imo]!      [i.e. not clever enough, imo]

Yadda wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 12:57pm:

miracles. - what is a miracle, except something an 'occurrence' we cannot explain - you want to witness a 'miracle' ? birth of a new child - watch the sun rise - embrace someone who you deeply love

You are avoiding the question with metaphor.

Everyone can accept that those things you mention are 'miracles' in the metaphoric sense.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 12:44pm:

Yadda wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 12:31pm: Like how in the early 20th cent. many circumstances [of history] conspired to bring about the formation of the state of Israel ? And how, despite many challenges throughout their history, today the Jewish people - defying all odds - have managed to create a great and productive nation for themselves - despite many attempts by their neighbours to undermine their achievements and security ? "They can because they think they can"... The Jewish people were able to create and to secure their Jewish state - purely because the Jewish people knew that they could accomplish that reality ? The history of Jews is an interesting example. As far as the stories of the old testament are concerned, almost unanimously now, Jewish intelligentsia, accept that they have no basis in history... They are myths... In other words, the Jewish right to the land is based on fantasy. As far as defending their right to exist in Israel is concerned, the argument is now not so much that the land was chosen for them (with the exception of the Ultra-Orthodox, who largely don't believe in the existence of Israel - believing only the coming of the Messiah in the flesh has the right to establish the state), but, having been vilified for thousands of years as the perennial fifth column in Europe, have little reason to trust Europeans with their lives within Europe. Nearly every nation in Europe has vilified, expelled or murdered them en masse. Even the 'great' religious reformer, Martin Luther, despised them and recommended their vilification and exile from Christendom. Their insistence on their right to exist in Israel is almost entirely due to fear of being murdered than the mythical 'god of the Jews'.

Jews today [some, many?] don't believe in God.

Its an opinion.       ;D

Yadda wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 1:09pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 12:44pm: Yadda wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 12:31pm: Like how in the early 20th cent. many circumstances [of history] conspired to bring about the formation of the state of Israel ? And how, despite many challenges throughout their history, today the Jewish people - defying all odds - have managed to create a great and productive nation for themselves - despite many attempts by their neighbours to undermine their achievements and security ? "They can because they think they can"... The Jewish people were able to create and to secure their Jewish state - purely because the Jewish people knew that they could accomplish that reality ? The history of Jews is an interesting example. As far as the stories of the old testament are concerned, almost unanimously now, Jewish intelligentsia, accept that they have no basis in history... They are myths... In other words, the Jewish right to the land is based on fantasy. As far as defending their right to exist in Israel is concerned, the argument is now not so much that the land was chosen for them (with the exception of the Ultra-Orthodox, who largely don't believe in the existence of Israel - believing only the coming of the Messiah in the flesh has the right to establish the state), but, having been vilified for thousands of years as the perennial fifth column in Europe, have little reason to trust Europeans with their lives within Europe. Nearly every nation in Europe has vilified, expelled or murdered them en masse. Even the 'great' religious reformer, Martin Luther, despised them and recommended their vilification and exile from Christendom. Their insistence on their right to exist in Israel is almost entirely due to fear of being murdered than the mythical 'god of the Jews'. Jews today [some, many?] don't believe in God. Its an opinion.       ;D

I think they subscribe to the ritual of being Jewish without the need to be 'god'-like and therefore much less burdened by frank belief than Christians who are burdened with striving to be Christ-like (an impossible feat when Christ is in effect a mythical god).

Yadda wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 1:05pm:

I like..... "It is my suspicion that the universe is not only stranger than we do imagine but it is stranger than we can imagine." J.B.S.Haldane - biochemist

Yes, the kind of statement from one who is so enamoured by wonder that he does not want to imagine an end to it...

True wonder is a childlike emotion (not childish).

I'd say the odds of its being totally imaginable are small.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 1:06pm:

Yadda wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 12:57pm: miracles. - what is a miracle, except something an 'occurrence' we cannot explain - you want to witness a 'miracle' ? birth of a new child - watch the sun rise - embrace someone who you deeply love You are avoiding the question with metaphor. Everyone can accept that those things you mention are 'miracles' in the metaphoric sense.

Let me express it this way;

I believe in 'supernatural' things, in the sense that man doesn't have the [intellectual?] capacity to understand what is happening about him.     [....and i include myself in that description of man's 'capacities']

I believe God, i trust God.

I trust that God, has my best interests at heart, because i firmly believe that God loves me.





Do i believe the account of the events of Exodus 14 ?

Yes.


Do i believe the account of the events of Daniel 3 ?

Yes.


Do i believe that the spirit of God can raise a man from the dead ?

Yes.






"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

Yadda wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 1:30pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 1:06pm: Yadda wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 12:57pm: miracles. - what is a miracle, except something an 'occurrence' we cannot explain - you want to witness a 'miracle' ? birth of a new child - watch the sun rise - embrace someone who you deeply love You are avoiding the question with metaphor. Everyone can accept that those things you mention are 'miracles' in the metaphoric sense. Let me express it this way; I believe in 'supernatural' things, in the sense that man doesn't have the [intellectual?] capacity to understand what is happening about him.     [....and i include myself in that description of man's 'capacities']

And in that you are probably one with all of us. 'Supernatural' as a metaphor for the unexplained... Totally congruent with secular thinking.


Yadda wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 1:30pm:

[ Do i believe the account of the events of Exodus 14 ? Yes. Do i believe the account of the events of Daniel 3 ? Yes. Do i believe that the spirit of God can raise a man from the dead ? Yes.

You are at odds with Jewish modern thinking (who have a much more powerful existential reason for discovering the literal truth of these myths than you or I can possibly imagine).

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 1:12pm:

Yadda wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 1:09pm: Jews today [some, many?] don't believe in God. Its an opinion.       ;D I think they subscribe to the ritual of being Jewish without the need to be 'god'-like and therefore much less burdened by frank belief than Christians who are burdened with striving to be Christ-like (an impossible feat when Christ is in effect a mythical god).

Not really.

The same God.



The spirit which was in Jesus, in the flesh, was the same spirit.

John 10:31
Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
32  Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
33  The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
34  Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35  If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36  Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
37  If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.
38  But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.i+++





But i know that it offends some people, the thought that there is a God.

[while i am in this body....] I see the same world, the very same reality, which you see.




John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
.....
14  And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.


John 8:56
Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
57  Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
58  Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
59  Then took they up stones to cast at him:...


John 10:30
I and my Father are one.

John 4:24
God is a Spirit:...

John 14:8
Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9  Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?


The spirit, the God, that led the Hebrews out of Egypt......

1 Corinthians 10:1
Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
2  And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
3  And did all eat the same spiritual meat;
4  And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

Yadda wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 1:57pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 1:12pm: Yadda wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 1:09pm: Jews today [some, many?] don't believe in God. Its an opinion.       ;D I think they subscribe to the ritual of being Jewish without the need to be 'god'-like and therefore much less burdened by frank belief than Christians who are burdened with striving to be Christ-like (an impossible feat when Christ is in effect a mythical god). Not really. The same God.

Convoluted and unnecessary theology where being burdened with being Christ-like is concerned. It's a much more powerful call to goodness (being Christ-like) with Jesus divorced from his own divinity.

Yadda wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 12:57pm:

How many of these do you believe in? angels, - YES! devils, - YES! demons Satan, - YES! witches, ????? - i could be classed as a witch - but i don't call spirits, i worship God, and i seek him goblins - more demons leprechauns - more demon entities elfs - more demons miracles. - what is a miracle, except something an 'occurrence' we cannot explain - you want to witness a 'miracle' ? birth of a new child - watch the sun rise - embrace someone who you deeply love ghosts, - YES!      [there was a ghost, an entity, in this [my] house, when i first came here] heaven - YES! hell - ??? - i believe that there will be an uncomfortable place of confinement for those who do not please God holy cracker biscuits that are Christ's body - it is a psychic aid, for those who need its 'power' holy wine that is his blood - it is a psychic aid, for those who need its 'power' resurrections - YES! You are forgiven namaste

forgiven for being a brainwashed superstitious fool.

namaste

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 2:01pm:

Yadda wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 1:57pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 1:12pm: Yadda wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 1:09pm: Jews today [some, many?] don't believe in God. Its an opinion.       ;D I think they subscribe to the ritual of being Jewish without the need to be 'god'-like and therefore much less burdened by frank belief than Christians who are burdened with striving to be Christ-like (an impossible feat when Christ is in effect a mythical god). Not really. The same God. Convoluted and unnecessary theology where being burdened with being Christ-like is concerned. It's a much more powerful call to goodness (being Christ-like) with Jesus divorced from his own divinity.

If the Jesus of scripture is real.

Then he was a perfect man [that is, a perfectly good man], who came to live among imperfect men.

And he was a perfect man, that was murdered/killed by the imperfect men he came to live among.

Poignant, when we meditate about what the actions of those men, says about all of us.

Deeply flawed.








"....Christians who are burdened with striving to be Christ-like (an impossible feat...."

God, our creator declares, that he can heal us.

But, do we want to be, 'Christ-like' ?

n.b.
God has said, [that in our walk] we do not have to [successfully] be 'Christ-like'.

We only have to demonstrate to him, that we want to be 'Christ-like'.



Most of us are content, to be like those who murdered God.

???

Dear Yadda,
This is the ultimate result of your superstition:

http://www.cuttingedge.org/News/n1676.cfm


Quote:

THE TRUE FACE OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC INQUISITION -- ROTTEN SPIRITUAL FRUIT FROM THE ABYSS OF HELL. The Roman Catholic Inquisition was one of the greatest disasters ever to befall mankind. In the name of Jesus Christ, Catholic priests mounted an enormous effort to kill all "heretics" in Europe and Britain. Heretics is defined whichever way Rome wanted it defined; it ranged from people who disagreed with official policy, to Hermetic Philosophers [Black Magick Practitioners], to Jews, to Witches, and to the Protestant reformers.

Yadda wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 2:49pm:

If the Jesus of scripture is real. Then he was a perfect man [that is, a perfectly good man], who came to live among imperfect men. And he was a perfect man, that was murdered/killed by the imperfect men he came to live among. Poignant, when we meditate about what the actions of those men, says about all of us. Deeply flawed.

Divorced from divinity (and miracles), Jesus doesn't need to be so perfect.

A Jesus theology which does not include divinity (which, remember, was conferred on him by the Council of Nicea), could even be adopted by secularists, given that there are no records of his sexual (or otherwise) peccadillos that plagued Gandhi, MLK and even Mandela - Modern day Christ-like figures whose 'perfection' grows more 'true' year by year.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 2:59pm:

Dear Yadda, This is the ultimate result of your superstition: http://www.cuttingedge.org/News/n1676.cfm Quote: THE TRUE FACE OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC INQUISITION -- ROTTEN SPIRITUAL FRUIT FROM THE ABYSS OF HELL. The Roman Catholic Inquisition was one of the greatest disasters ever to befall mankind. In the name of Jesus Christ, Catholic priests mounted an enormous effort to kill all "heretics" in Europe and Britain. Heretics is defined whichever way Rome wanted it defined; it ranged from people who disagreed with official policy, to Hermetic Philosophers [Black Magick Practitioners], to Jews, to Witches, and to the Protestant reformers.

Protestants of that era weren't any better. Martin Luther led the way with his Jew-hate.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 3:02pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 2:59pm: Dear Yadda, This is the ultimate result of your superstition: http://www.cuttingedge.org/News/n1676.cfm Quote: THE TRUE FACE OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC INQUISITION -- ROTTEN SPIRITUAL FRUIT FROM THE ABYSS OF HELL. The Roman Catholic Inquisition was one of the greatest disasters ever to befall mankind. In the name of Jesus Christ, Catholic priests mounted an enormous effort to kill all "heretics" in Europe and Britain. Heretics is defined whichever way Rome wanted it defined; it ranged from people who disagreed with official policy, to Hermetic Philosophers [Black Magick Practitioners], to Jews, to Witches, and to the Protestant reformers. Protestants of that era weren't any better. Martin Luther led the way with his Jew-hate.

True - the whole of Europe was full of crazy religious nutcases.

Unfortunately there seems to be a revival of them.

Religion will always be with us, no matter how dictatorships try to stamp it out. It's like phosphorus ~ you can't keep it in a jar forever. It only needs exposure to the air before it burst into flames again.

The best we can hope for is to ensure that the various religions don't ascend to political control over our western societies as they once did to horrific effect.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 3:49pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 3:02pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 2:59pm: Dear Yadda, This is the ultimate result of your superstition: http://www.cuttingedge.org/News/n1676.cfm Quote: THE TRUE FACE OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC INQUISITION -- ROTTEN SPIRITUAL FRUIT FROM THE ABYSS OF HELL. The Roman Catholic Inquisition was one of the greatest disasters ever to befall mankind. In the name of Jesus Christ, Catholic priests mounted an enormous effort to kill all "heretics" in Europe and Britain. Heretics is defined whichever way Rome wanted it defined; it ranged from people who disagreed with official policy, to Hermetic Philosophers [Black Magick Practitioners], to Jews, to Witches, and to the Protestant reformers. Protestants of that era weren't any better. Martin Luther led the way with his Jew-hate. True - the whole of Europe was full of crazy religious nutcases. Unfortunately there seems to be a revival of them.

The neo-Christian medieval revival has its home in the US. Easily the creepiest and most pernicious of all Christian sects... Beating many time over the (relatively miniscule) isolationist Christian sects (i.e. closed brethren and not counting Mennonites and Amish).

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 3:49pm:

True - the whole of Europe was full of crazy religious nutcases. Unfortunately there seems to be a revival of them.

Particularly those of the fervent atheistic kind.

It goes beyond decency to sermonise about other people's personal beliefs. Live and let live. 

muso wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 4:04pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 3:49pm: True - the whole of Europe was full of crazy religious nutcases. Unfortunately there seems to be a revival of them. Particularly those of the fervent atheistic kind. It goes beyond decency to sermonise about other people's personal beliefs. Live and let live.

Dear Muso,
I ideology of Nazism was rejected by the world because of what the Nazis did.

Somehow the world seems to forget about what the ideology of religion led to.
It's presumed as being ok for some unknown reason & to
even question it is considered  wrong & the usual
reason is that it's not respecting someone else's beliefs.

We don't respect Nazi beliefs.



forgiven

namaste

Lord Herbert wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 3:56pm:

Religion will always be with us, no matter how dictatorships try to stamp it out. It's like phosphorus ~ you can't keep it in a jar forever. It only needs exposure to the air before it burst into flames again. The best we can hope for is to ensure that the various religions don't ascend to political control over our western societies as they once did to horrific effect.

The next great (quasi) 'religion' to  ascend to political control over our western societies is (as Tariq Ali coined) the 'extreme centre' (the extreme left and right having been discredited).

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 4:16pm:

muso wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 4:04pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 3:49pm: True - the whole of Europe was full of crazy religious nutcases. Unfortunately there seems to be a revival of them. Particularly those of the fervent atheistic kind. It goes beyond decency to sermonise about other people's personal beliefs. Live and let live.  Dear Muso, I ideology of Nazism was rejected by the world because of what the Nazis did. Somehow the world seems to forget about what the ideology of religion led to. It's presumed as being ok for some unknown reason & to even question it is considered  wrong & the usual reason is that it's not respecting someone else's beliefs. We don't respect Nazi beliefs. forgiven namaste

Funny, though, it turns out most wars that have been fought are not of a religious nature, they are in the cause of settling the affairs of Kings, blatant land grabs, military adventurism or ethnic hatred.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 4:16pm:

muso wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 4:04pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 3:49pm: True - the whole of Europe was full of crazy religious nutcases. Unfortunately there seems to be a revival of them. Particularly those of the fervent atheistic kind. It goes beyond decency to sermonise about other people's personal beliefs. Live and let live.  Dear Muso, I ideology of Nazism was rejected by the world because of what the Nazis did. Somehow the world seems to forget about what the ideology of religion led to. It's presumed as being ok for some unknown reason & to even question it is considered  wrong & the usual reason is that it's not respecting someone else's beliefs. We don't respect Nazi beliefs. forgiven namaste

It's a non sequitur. Nazism was a consequence of fervent nationalism plus some greed and arrogance. Just because Hitler was Christian is irrelevent. Most of the major combatants in Europe at that time were Christian. You could just as well argue that the allied victory against Hitler was inspired by Christianity. Some did.


Nazi Germany formed an alliance with Japan. The religious perspective was largely irrelevent. 

muso wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 4:40pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 4:16pm: muso wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 4:04pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 3:49pm: True - the whole of Europe was full of crazy religious nutcases. Unfortunately there seems to be a revival of them. Particularly those of the fervent atheistic kind. It goes beyond decency to sermonise about other people's personal beliefs. Live and let live.  Dear Muso, I ideology of Nazism was rejected by the world because of what the Nazis did. Somehow the world seems to forget about what the ideology of religion led to. It's presumed as being ok for some unknown reason & to even question it is considered  wrong & the usual reason is that it's not respecting someone else's beliefs. We don't respect Nazi beliefs. forgiven namaste It's a non sequitur. Nazism was a consequence of fervent nationalism plus some greed and arrogance. Just because Hitler was Christian is irrelevent. Most of the major combatants in Europe at that time were Christian. You could just as well argue that the allied victory against Hitler was inspired by Christianity. Some did. Nazi Germany formed an alliance with Japan. The religious perspective was largely irrelevent.

I referred to dangerous ideology.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 4:46pm:

I referred to dangerous ideology.

Right, so you were just playing the Hitler card.

muso wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 8:02pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 4:46pm: I referred to dangerous ideology. Right, so you were just playing the Hitler card.

It's a very good analogy -
both ideologies were responsible for mass murder of innocent people.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 9^th, 2014 at 9:10pm:

muso wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 8:02pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 9th, 2014 at 4:46pm: I referred to dangerous ideology. Right, so you were just playing the Hitler card. It's a very good analogy - both ideologies were responsible for mass murder of innocent people.

Then you'd have to include democracy in your list of 'evil' 'murderous ideologies then, wouldn't you... Vietnam, Cambodia, Iraq, Mosaddegh's Iran, Allende's Chile...

Reductio ad Hitlerum must only be deployed with caution and skill.